- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Mon, 3 May 2010 22:43:01 +0000 (UTC)
- To: bob quinn <rcq@sockets.com>
- Cc: Eduard Pascual <herenvardo@gmail.com>, Fenton Travers <fenton_travers@yahoo.com>, Jock Murphy <jockm@stufflabs.com>, public-html-comments@w3.org
On Mon, 3 May 2010, bob quinn wrote: > At 09:35 PM 5/2/2010, Ian Hickson wrote: > >Browsers don't generally claim to support a particular version, unless > >they're lying. For example, nobody has ever implemented all of HTML4 > >correctly. I don't think that's been a problem. > > Inconsistent implementations is the result of a lack of an identifiable > standard, and yes, it most certainly is a problem. I strongly disagree that the inconsistent implementations are the result of the lack of versioning in specifications. HTML4 was very clearly versioned, and it wasn't consistently implemented. I think what causes inconsistent implementations is vague requirements in specs, which HTML4 had many of, and which we've dramatically reduced in today's HTML spec. > Speaking as both a web developer and implementor, trying to hit an > ill-defined target is just a headache. You've never been able to target a specific version of HTML, so I don't think that not having specific versions changes this at all. > >I'm more interested in having the spec be realistic and useful for > >implementors and authors than optimising it for making it easier to > >make claims of conformance. > > If there is a difference between these two goals, then there is a > problem. If the goal is to make it easier to make claims of conformance, the easiest way is to remove all conformance requirements. Clearly that isn't the same as making a spec useful. > Implementors MUST work together to assure consistent behaviors and > identify the ambiguous and less-than-useful areas of the specification. > Only after hands-on, head-to-head, "bake-offs" to verify "realistic and > useful" status has been obtained should the spec be deemed "standard." I agree. All I'm saying is that this should happen on a section-by-section basis rather than on the basis of the whole spec or specs. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 3 May 2010 22:43:37 UTC