W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2007

Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information)

From: Dannii <curiousdannii@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 19:26:03 +1000
Message-ID: <af3e73120704170226m35faab83h7c3fd5041f632a58@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: public-html@w3.org
On 4/17/07, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2007, Henrik Dvergsdal wrote:
> >
> > As I indicated earlier: There will always be aspects of programming
> > languages (and programs) that aren't automatically checked.
> Yes, but we want these aspects to be as few and far between as possible.
> We want to encourage an ecosystem where conformance checkers compete over
> how many errors they can test for, in the same way that browsers compete
> in how many test cases they pass.
> I love the idea of that. Even if there weren't other reasons, that by
itself would be enough to convince me no official schema is needed.
Obviously working from a DTD alone isn't enough to produce a good browser,
so why check only it?

And personally, I don't think there is anything wrong with an English-only
specification. By defining carefully any words used, English can be just as
specific as a machine readable spec, prehaps even more so.
Received on Tuesday, 17 April 2007 09:26:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:18 UTC