Henri Sivonen wrote: >> The benefits of putting the list in the same document as that which >> defines the vocabulary is purely an editorial and process benefit, it >> isn't a benefit to implementors. Benefits to implementors outweigh >> benefits to us. I personally would rather not have to maintain this list >> myself, just like I'm sure the SVGWG would rather be in control of that >> part of the HTML parsing rules instead of having to potentially have >> cross-working group discussions with each new element; but our own >> desires >> are the least important concern here, according to our "priority of >> constituencies" design principle. > > If we want the list to be more malleable than the rest of the algorithm > definition document, the algorithm spec should have a link to a URI > which will dereference to the latest list at any given point in time. A > great bonus would be if the document at the URI came with revision history. > That sounds acceptable to me from the point of view of implementing this in html5lib. (For comparison, it would not be acceptable if I was expected to reconstruct the list myself from some version of the SVG spec).Received on Tuesday, 24 March 2009 14:38:01 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:55:11 GMT