W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > November 2008

Re: Cleaning House

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 23:33:58 +0000 (UTC)
To: Tina Holmboe <tina@greytower.net>
Cc: Jim Jewett <jimjjewett@gmail.com>, David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>, www-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0811172332520.1041@hixie.dreamhostps.com>

On Tue, 18 Nov 2008, Tina Holmboe wrote:
> On 17 Nov, Ian Hickson wrote:
> 
> >> Section 3.6 would be much simpler if it didn't have to worry about 
> >> optional and implied tags.
> >> 
> >> Section 3.8 would almost disappear.
> > 
> > Why does the size of the spec matter? Surely the benefit to authors 
> > far, far outweigh the benefits to the spec community?
> 
> A monolithic specification is less likely to be read. A shorter, to the 
> point, specification benefit content and site creators alike.

That's why we're writing an authoring guide.

I think a language that is easy to use plus a friendly authoring guide and 
a big spec to make it all happen is better than a language that is 
technically simpler but harder to use with a simpler spec.

(I'm also not convinced it would make the spec much simpler.)

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 17 November 2008 23:34:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:16:14 GMT