- From: Jukka K. Korpela <jukka.k.korpela@kolumbus.fi>
- Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2013 14:50:34 +0300
- To: public-html-comments@w3.org
2013-03-30 18:57, Allen Flick wrote: > The silliest thing you can do, as the authority on web standards, is > leave <marquee> > scrolling text</marquee> the way it is ..... totally in limbo, letting > each browser decide > to implement it or not. That's not what HTML5 drafts are doing. On the contrary, they define the <marquee> element (for the first time in history - existing HTML specifications are totally ignorant of it) and require that browsers support it. They also say that you must not use it, but there is really no army or police that is going to stop you, or even a lawyer to sue you. Description of <marquee> in HTML5 Candidate Recommendation: http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/obsolete.html#the-marquee-element-0 A useful clarification: "For example, user agents will be required to support the marquee element, but authors must not use the marquee element in conforming documents. It is important to make the distinction between the rules that apply to user agents and the rules that apply to authors for producing conforming documents. They are completely orthogonal." Source: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ#Why_does_this_new_HTML_spec_legitimise_tag_soup.3F In effect, this means that two language versions are defined (very similarly to Strict vs. Transitional in HTML 4.01): the language that authors should (or "shall") use, and the language that browsers are required to use, i.e. the "conforming" language and the "real" language. However, the documents don't put things this way, since the language designers think that it would encourage authors into using language features that they (the language designers) don't like. -- Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Received on Sunday, 31 March 2013 11:51:00 UTC