- From: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 14:25:17 -0700
- To: Henrik Dvergsdal <henrik.dvergsdal@hibo.no>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
In my opinion "loose ends" doesn't go far enough. :) I'd hesitate to even call HTML4 a specification. It has many areas that basically only sketch out behavior rather than actually bothering to specify it. Tables are a great example of this. dave (hyatt@apple.com) On Apr 10, 2007, at 2:10 PM, Henrik Dvergsdal wrote: > > > On 10. apr. 2007, at 21.16, L. David Baron wrote: > >> On Tuesday 2007-04-10 20:38 +0200, Henrik Dvergsdal wrote: >>> If we are to make a jump like this, I think it we should have a >>> really strict delta document. One that we can trust contains all >>> significant aspects of differences between the HTML4 and HTML5 specs >>> at all times. This should not be just a wiki. I think the editor >>> should be responsible for keeping it up to date as the proposal >>> evolves. >> >> I don't think this makes sense. >> >> One of the problems I hope this group will solve is that HTML4 is >> frequently ambiguous and often lacks conformance requirements where >> it should have them. In other words, it frequently doesn't define >> the things a spec ought to be defining. Many parts of it are not >> useful at any level deeper than as a list of requested features, and >> I don't think it's useful, or worth anyone's time, to track >> differences between a list of requested features and an actual >> specification designed to lead to interoperable implementations. >> > > I simply disagree on this. I have used HTML as an author/developer > since its inception and I admit has some loose ends, but describing > (part of) it as being just a list of features is going a bit far. > > > -- > Henrik >
Received on Tuesday, 10 April 2007 21:25:19 UTC