- From: Mihai Sucan <mihai.sucan@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 13:05:58 +0300
- To: "Bruce Boughton" <bruce@bruceboughton.me.uk>
- Cc: "Lachlan Hunt" <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, public-html@w3.org
Le Sun, 15 Apr 2007 12:43:48 +0300, Bruce Boughton <bruce@bruceboughton.me.uk> a écrit: > Mihai Sucan wrote: >> >> While I personally want a switch like this "always standards-mode", I >> don't agree with the assumption "we are competent enough to make >> informed decisions for ourselves". >> >> [..] The majority of web developers working in companies *will* make >> use of this switch unknowingly of the consequences, and then they'll >> blame IE [n] for breaking their pages (because they relied on some old >> bugs). >> > > To find themselves in this situation, they must first explicitly opt-in > to HTML5 standards mode with <!DOCTYPE html>. When IE9 comes out and > perhaps breaks their sites, they can then add the IE8 mode switch. If > they were competent enough to find out about <!DOCTYPE html> they should > be competent enough to find the mode switch if hand coding. I would not > expect a programmer to program Java without referring to the API, so I > don't see why we expect people hand-coding HTML not to refer to the > spec. For those that don't hand code their HTML, it is important that > tools vendors expose this option. I don't agree with that. The majority of incompetent web developers use tutorials and copy/paste script, use frameworks and anything premade. Given such switch, frameworks will require it and will only tell you "please copy/paste the following line at the beginning of the HTML page". They'll spare the details, if you know what I mean. It is inevitable, given the switch, we will end up with tons of documents relying on buggy behaviour in IE.next. IE n+1 will break those pages if it doesn't add yet another switch. -- http://www.robodesign.ro
Received on Sunday, 15 April 2007 10:06:07 UTC