- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 00:22:14 -0700
- To: public-html@w3.org
- Message-ID: <20070427072214.GA3721@ridley.dbaron.org>
I have another proposed requirement that I've been meaning to write up for a while. This fits in with the "WellDefinedBehavior" item on the wiki [1], but it's somewhat more strongly stated. I think the HTML specification should specify HTML to the level of detail necessary to handle Web content. In order to keep the information on the Web freely accessible (to whoever wants to write tools to look at that information) and to encourage competition in software dealing with Web content (browsers, editors, etc.) which in turn tends to improve the quality of that software, I think that if a particular behavior is needed to handle Web content correctly, it should be described in some freely implementable specification. That's a pretty strong statement of rationale that I think some others may not agree with in general. However, I wonder if we could get agreement on it as it applies to HTML. This would mean that one of these behaviors that needs to be described (based on my previous paragraph) relates to the handling of HTML, it should be described in the HTML specification. In HTML (as in other specifications with multiple implementations), doing this is likely to improve interoperability, which improves the experience of both authors and users (writers and readers). What does this mean in practice? I see two things: 1. We should try to describe as much of this behavior as we can. We probably won't get all of it, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to be as complete as reasonably possible. 2. We should not accept a "leave things undefined" compromise when the missing definition is broad enough that some definitions would handle existing (or future?) Web content as intended and some would break it. (Of course, there will sometimes be difficult cases where the existing content goes both ways.) We should instead at the very least narrow the definition to a set of things that do handle existing Web content correctly. -David [1] http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/ProposedDesignPrinciples , which currently says: WellDefinedBehavior: Prefer to clearly define behavior that content authors could rely on, in preference to vague or implementation-defined behavior. This way, it is easier to author content that works in a variety of user agents. However, implementations should still be free to make improvements in areas such as user interface and quality of rendering. -- L. David Baron <URL: http://dbaron.org/ > Technical Lead, Layout & CSS, Mozilla Corporation
Received on Friday, 27 April 2007 07:22:19 UTC