- From: Dão Gottwald <dao@design-noir.de>
- Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 11:57:53 +0200
- To: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- CC: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Karl Dubost schrieb: >> CSS, > > It is very difficult for validator developers to create a useful tool > because of this. We are forced for now to guess the versioning by > analyzing which properties are here or not. Since CSS x tends to be a superset of CSS x-1, what's the problem with just assuming the latest recommendation? Sure, the levels are not fully backwards-compatible. But then again, if the latest recommendation makes something obsolete, I would expect the validator to warn me. >> PHP, > > The scripts have indeed no version information but the test for it is > "working" or "not working. The developer develops for a specific version. > "Download PHP version X.", > "You can't use this function with PHP version X." > It is a closed/wall garden environment as in my scripts are limited by > the capabilities of the libraries installed on the server. PHP 5 is 99% backwards-compatible; a script written for PHP 4 just works with PHP 5 in most cases. Of course, that's not the case the other way around and there may be other dependencies. I didn't want to say that PHP (or any other mentioned language) is hundred per cent comparable to HTML. I just wanted to cite some examples for why I think "it's still good language design to identify the specific language version" is not an accomplished fact. --Dao
Received on Monday, 30 April 2007 09:58:02 UTC