Re: HTML version issue summary?

On Apr 24, 2007, at 9:01 PM, Jeff Schiller wrote:

> On 4/24/07, David Hyatt <> wrote:
>> (4) I think IE's opt-in should be independent of DOCTYPE until such
>> time as they are confident that they have HTML5.0 fully implemented
>> and supported.  Then one could imagine the doctype being used as the
>> opt-in.
> I'm trying to understand this suggestion, but still don't get it.  I
> think I have the same concern as Maciej in that every HTML5 document
> that comes out would have to include the IE-specific opt-in mechanism
> when a "perfectly good" opt-in solution (whatever the proposed HTML5
> DOCTYPE or version attribute) would exist for Microsoft to use right
> out of the gate.

My assumption is that IE would only have to use such an opt-in (a  
custom one) if their implementation was really far off, e.g., only  
20% done, or full of enough experimental features/dangerous bugs that  
they'd be reluctant to brand it as official.  If what they produce is  
great and close enough to the standard, then I'd expect they could  
use the doctype switch right out of the gate instead.

I guess what I'm getting at is that as far as the HTML WG is  
concerned, all we have to do is define a way of identifying HTML5  
(either a doctype or attribute) and then state that a fully  
conforming HTML5 browser uses this version switch as a definitive  
trigger for "HTML5 mode."  The custom opt-in idea is not something  
that people should really latch on to here, since that is really  
completely out of our hands.

I only suggested it as a failsafe option if MSFT is worried that  
people would rush out and adopt a possibly broken implementation if  
they release something too early.


Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2007 05:16:43 UTC