- From: Sander Tekelenburg <st@isoc.nl>
- Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 01:12:05 +0200
- To: <public-html@w3.org>, <wri-talk@webrepair.org>
At 14:03 -0700 UTC, on 2007-04-19, Chris Wilson wrote: [...] > We will have our own proprietary, non-invalidating opt-in switch to "really >standards as of IEn" mode. Do you agree with my earlier analysis[*] that a proprietary switch would make it much harder for authors to produce conforming web pages? If so, can you explain why this should be acceptable? [*] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Apr/1203.html> > (If there are no breaking changes, we don't need to worry about this. >That is unlikely to happen for quite a while.) I can't follow. "breaking changes" in what? "worry" by whom about what? > I want the HTML spec to have version - e.g. in DOCTYPE - because I 1) think >it's insane to build a format with no version identifier, and 2) will >opportunistically use this to automatically turn on any future opt-ins when >such a version identifier becomes popular. I'm afraid I cannot follow this either. Could you elaborate please? (Not just for me. I get the impression that your standpoint isn't clear to quite a few people. If it would become clear to more people there'd be a better chance we can work towards a solution, instead of proposing solutions based on misunderstanding of the situation.) -- Sander Tekelenburg The Web Repair Initiative: <http://webrepair.org/>
Received on Thursday, 19 April 2007 23:18:01 UTC