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

Re: HTML version issue summary?

From: Dão Gottwald <dao@design-noir.de>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 13:25:04 +0200
Message-ID: <462F3A90.8010305@design-noir.de>
To: Matthew Raymond <mattraymond@earthlink.net>
CC: Jeff Schiller <codedread@gmail.com>, public-html@w3.org

Matthew Raymond schrieb:
> Jeff Schiller wrote:
>> I guess the theory here is that Microsoft has the farthest to go to
>> "get it right"?  Therefore, in the first version of IE that supports
>> any form of HTML5, the web authors better _really_ be sure that they
>> want to trigger HTML5 processing in IE (above and beyond the standard
>> DOCTYPE/version attribute mechanism)?
>    If support for HTML5 is so bad in IE that HTML 4.01 rendering is
> preferable, I think most people would rather use HTML 4.01. However, I
> just don't envision a scenario where IE's handling of HTML5 is so bad
> that you want IE to treat compliant HTML5 documents as HTML 4.01.

You could use the proprietary opt-in then.
Thing is, IE.next will handle HTML5 documents significantly worse than 
IE.next+1. If IE.next uses the HTML5 doctype as an opt-in, that will 
render that doctype useless for IE.next+1 as a trigger for real 
standards rendering. That's similar to the current situation. We want to 
avoid that.

> It
> would be market share suicide. Think about it: Why would anyone depend
> on a product from a company that can't support standards even when their
> head browser developer is the chair of the working group that developed
> the standard in question?

1. Nobody wants Microsoft to not support standards. We want them to do
    it in a sane, future-proof way.
2. You're ignoring that Dave proposed to support opt-ins to the new but
    not yet finished rendering mode.
3. People did depend on broken IE versions for years. Go figure.

Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2007 11:25:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:19 UTC