W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > March 2013

Re: Polyglot: the final thread?

From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2013 10:44:34 +0000
Message-ID: <51459E92.9080500@ninebynine.org>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
CC: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>, "www-tag@w3.org List" <www-tag@w3.org>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
+1

As a developer, I really want to know there are patterns I can generate that 
work for the widest possible range of clients (browsers and otherwise).

#g
--

On 17/03/2013 06:44, Larry Masinter wrote:
>> Just because the polyglot discussion awakens some of the old XML/HTML
>> politics doesn't mean it's architectural. At any rate there certainly
>> are more pressing topics for the TAG to apply its energies to.
>
> If the TAG is considering withdrawing its previous request, I wanted to make sure the TAG understood the reasons why I thought specifying Polyglot was important.
>
> Not only does it represent an enormous swath of the web (even 1% of web sites is enormous), but it is also the integrity of W3C as a responsible standards organization.
>
> * HTML is the most important specification in the W3C.
>
> * The HTML 4.01 recommendation was replaced by the XHTML 1.0 recommendation. It was important, as part of that effort, to describe a transition plan from HTML to XHTML, which was at least the motivation for Appendix C (which I supported in the HTML working group at the time).
>
> * Now that the intention is to obsolete XHTML with HTML (5), it would be irresponsible of W3C to not specify a transition plan for those who (for better or worse) adopted the previous W3C recommendation.
>
> * That is, HTML / XHTML polyglot is not some random minor transition path, it's the most important transition W3C is engaged in.
>
> * Perhaps only 6% of web sites hage polyglot home pages (although the use cases I imagine, the polyglot pages are more internal, where content is more important than presentation.)
>
> As for discussing this on public-html, I've submitted comments in the track
>
> Now, perhaps the 'architectural' principle is that every new version of a specification should provide an adequate description of the deployment/transition plan from the previous recommendation. HTML/XHTML polyglot should be advanced as part of that, if only to properly obsolete XHTML Appendix C.
>
> Larry
>
Received on Monday, 18 March 2013 07:54:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 18 March 2013 07:54:41 GMT