W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > April 2007

Re: Semicolon after entities

From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
Date: Tue, 01 May 2007 02:52:06 +1000
Message-ID: <46361EB6.1060606@lachy.id.au>
To: tina@greytower.net
CC: www-html@w3.org

Tina Holmboe wrote:
> On  1 May, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
> 
>>>  While admitting that, will you still stand by the philosophy that
>>>  the most reasonable behaviour should be based on *what existing
>>>  browsers do*?
>> Yes.  Any behaviour we define has to be compatible with the existing 
>> content on the web, much of which relies on such behaviour.  This 
>> doesn't mean we need to document every single bug in every browser. 
>> We need to define a common set

Oops, I forgot to finish or revise that sentence before I sent...

>   A common set of /bugs/ with which new standards/browsers should be
>   compliant? Did I understand you correctly? 

I meant to say that we need to define the set of features that are 
essential for remaining compatible with the content on the web, which is 
determined by doing research into what browsers do and studying the 
content that exists on the web today.

>   Regardless, I have two follow-up questions:
> 
>    - If we are going to make the HTML 5 specification compliant with
>      what browsers support and/or DO today, instead of changing UAs to
>      /follow/ the spec, then how does this process differ from what
>      happened with HTML 3.2?

I'm not entirely sure what you're referring to as I wasn't around when 
HTML 3.2 was developed and I don't know what the process was back then.

But what I can tell you is that the development of HTML5 is putting a 
lot of effort into ensuring that the spec can and will be implemented by 
browsers.  That requires more than just writing the spec and telling 
them to implement it.  It requires actively seeking out, listening to 
and responding to feedback from vendors, and changing the spec where 
appropriate, based on that feedback.

For instance, if a feature proves either difficult or impossible to 
implement, the spec will be adjusted to make it easier, or even dropped 
entirely.  By the time HTML5 becomes a REC, there will be no 
unimplemented features within it.

>    - Is this the official policy of the W3C? 

I have no idea what the official policy of the W3C is and I won't 
speculate on it either.

-- 
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/
Received on Monday, 30 April 2007 16:52:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:16:09 GMT