Re: An HTML language specification

ext Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2008, John Kemp wrote:
>> All I was suggesting was that the exact same HTML5 language which is 
>> being defined in the current HTML5 draft is put into a separate 
>> document, describing only the actual language. I believe that is what 
>> Michael has already attempted.
>>
>> I fail to see how that particular operation affects the possibility to 
>> achieve well-defined specifications or interoperable implementations.
> 
> Mike's document doesn't contain implementation requirements. I'm not sure 
> how to extend Mike's pattern to a spec that also includes implementation 
> requirements. For a simple example, consider <video src="">, whose 
> implementation definition is deeply integrated with the definition of the 
> HTMLMediaElement API. How would you separate the two cleanly?

Are you saying that if I were to parse an HTML 5 document and find the 
element

<video src="">
   ...
</video>

that the only possible meaningful representation of it is as an 
HTMLVideoElement?

If not, shouldn't Mike's document be free of DOM-specific implementation 
requirements (which is not to say that they shouldn't exist - in order 
to properly define the HTMLMediaElement API)?

Regards,

- johnk