- From: Henrik Dvergsdal <henrik.dvergsdal@hibo.no>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 12:17:11 +0200
- To: public-html@w3.org
On 10. apr. 2007, at 11.36, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > I could give my personal opinion on these points if you are curious > but I don't think it is relevant to the question of adopting HTML5. > And I certainly would not be speaking for everyone who signed the > letter. On 10. apr. 2007, at 11.39, Dao Gottwald wrote: > I don't follow your reasoning. Using HTML5 as a /starting point/ > doesn't mean that any resolution of the WHATWG is set in stone. OK. I get your point, but there seems to be a common vision here and I think it will be useful to get a sense the whole picture. It would at least help putting the decision into perspective. So what is your *personal* opinion on this then? Do you think this seems like a good strategy: 1. We start with HTML5 in its current state. 2. We add all that's necessary to define "exactly how to handle the web as it is today" (Hunt). This means all components that are being used in current web pages, including, for instance, elements like <blink>, <blackface> and <marquee> and all the "undocumented, unspecified, frozen set of bugs" (Hickson) that people rely on out there. 3. We organize the standard into sets of "recommended", "right" components, and sets of forbidden, "wrong" components: This "effectively means that we discourage people from using the elements (it's forbidden, the elements don't event exist as far as authors are concerned), but "require" user agents to support them so they don't lose market share, render the web and such" (van Kesteren, offlist). 4. We then freeze the standard and let evolve in two ways only: (1) by bug fixing and (2) by incorporating new components once they are actually being used - "we cannot afford to change behavior, nor can we afford to remove features from browsers once they are used" (Hickson). This means that if, for instance, Microsoft implements some new element in IE and people start using it, it will automatically be included in the standard and all the others will have to follow. -- Henrik
Received on Tuesday, 10 April 2007 10:17:34 UTC