- From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 11:18:44 +1000
- To: Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
On 19/04/2007, at 2:27 AM, Chris Wilson wrote: > Dannii wrote: >> And it can be left out completely? Sounds very good. > > If we decide on a version attribute rather than part of the > doctype, then I must insist if the version is omitted it must > default to 5. "Default is whatever the latest version is" is > unacceptable, for authoring as well as for compatible behavior in > our browser. It would really help if you would actually do some research about (or at least listen to) what authors actually want, instead of being presumptuous. There have been many web developers, including myself, saying (both on and off list) that they want an always-standards mode option. Every single one that I have discussed this issue with off list strongly objects to your plan to perpetuate every bug you ever release and require explicit opt ins for nearly every new browser version. I will try to get feedback from many more developers concerning this issue and make it available to you as evidence for my arguments. Many authors, particularly those in the web standards community, have been promoting and using HTML 4.01 Strict DOCTYPEs expecting that it would always be standards mode in every browser; and it seems that it will be in all but IE. In other words, many of use took for granted that HTML 4.01 Strict was an always-standards mode option, yet you unfortunately have power to take that away from us. What right do you have to speak for web developers? You should not presume you know what authors want, especially without actually asking or even listening to them when they tell you directly! Personally, I find your implication (from this and other emails you've posted) that we didn't know what we wanted when we opted into full standards mode using HTML 4.01 Strict DOCTYPEs, and that we still won't know when we use HTML5 DOCTYPEs, offensive. -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.au/
Received on Thursday, 19 April 2007 01:19:10 UTC