W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > January 2009

Re: HTML 5 and XHTML 2 combined

From: <olafBuddenhagen@gmx.net>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 17:11:53 +0100
To: www-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <20090124161150.GB928@alien.local>

Hi,

On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 08:28:37AM -0500, Brett Patterson wrote:

> But, Olaf, why are browser vendors allowed to choose what is right and
> wrong with HTML and XHTML, and coders are to play along, and the
> working groups that build upon HTML and XHTML (work with it, fix it,
> whatever) suppose to conform to browser vendor's goals? They should
> not be allowed to tell working groups what should and should not be
> allowed! It is not up to them.

It makes perfect sense that the spec is created by those who will
ultimately implement it. That's true for all kinds of standards -- why
should HTML be an exception?

> If it is, what is the purpose of the working groups? Are the working
> groups composed only of browser vendors, or both designers/coders and
> browser vendors?

The purpose of working groups is for the people implementing the stuff
to agree on a common standard. This is how the HTML5 working group came
into being. Any working group created in a different fashion is a
misunderstanding.

> Vendors should be made to follow the standards and codes, and ideas
> and goals of the working group, should they not?

Good luck "making" them :-)

I'm really not talking about what is "right" -- I'm talking about what
actually happens. Browser vendors didn't like the idea of XHTML2, so
they created HTML5. It's as simple as that.

I must say that as a browser implementor, I'd *love* a new standard that
is clean, simple, and not burdened with legacy. (XHTML2 as it stands
doesn't really fulfill this promise, though...)

As a web author, I do not really care much -- a cleaner standard doesn't
make much difference, aside from appealing to my sense of aesthetics.

However, in both roles, I cheer the creation of HTML5.

For me as a browser implementor, a completely new standard doesn't
remove the need of supporting existing HTML for a long long time.
Standardization of inevitable things like error handling and new
features introduced by other browser vendors is a great help with that.

As a web author, I'm thrilled by the prospect of being able to use new
features in a standards compliant and backwards compatible way in the
forseeable future, rather than having to wait for the hen-and-egg
situation with a completely new standard to resolve, eventually, if
ever...

-antrik-
Received on Sunday, 25 January 2009 04:23:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:16:15 GMT