- From: Rob Burns <robburns1@mac.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 02:15:59 -0500
- To: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Hello all, I categorized the HTML5 changes on the HTML main wiki page [1]. I think the list might look overwhelming in its previous form. Now I think some of the categories and subcategories do no require much explanation. For example, it would not surprise most WG members to see elements and attribute previously deprecated in HTML 4.01 dropped in HTML5. A similar status for many presentational elements and attributes. Those elements and attributes that are BOTH deprecated in HTML 4.01 and presentational hardly need further explanation. Below I've included a basic outline of the categorization. The items with asterisks probably are in most need of explanation. if those long-time members of the WhatWG could recollect some of the discussions that went on surrounding these issues, that would be very helpful. As our editor has said several times: focussing "on solutions before fully describing problems [...] isn't an effective language design strategy, and would IMHO be ultimately doomed to failure if we followed it. " I understand that much of this material is buried in the WhatWG mail archives, but I think to make this process work it really needs to be brought to the Wiki so that we can all build a shared understanding and consensus for this project. Newly added elements and attributes ------------------------- The highest priority is probably the newly added elements and attributes. Understanding the use-cases/problem-statements that motivated adding these solutions to the language would aide all of us in reviewing, understanding and discussing the HTML5 draft. Sometimes the use-case may be obvious, but in many cases it is not. Elements with changed meaning ------------------------- Following those, there is the issue of the modified meaning of elements: B, I, SMALL,HR and STRONG. There has been some discussion on the list serve surrounding these changes, However, especially considering the name collision issues surrounding these namespace conflicts, it would be a good idea to start new wiki pages that state specifically what problem motivates such changes to these elements. That way the WG can place other solutions along-side those solutions and we can step back and take a wider view of these problems and solutions. Dropped elements ------------------------- Two dropped elements stand out.: NOSCRIPT and APPLET. NOSCRIPT is dropped from the XML serialization, but remains in the text/html serialization. It would be helpful for someone to explain why we're creating this difference in the serialization. If it's only for backwards compatibility, could we not drop NOSCRIPT form the document conformance criteria and keep it in the UA conformance criteria. This would help erase another difference between the serializations. On the issue of APPLET, though it was deprecated in HTML 4.01, HTML5 introduces similar semantic distinctions with the CANVAS, AUDIO, and VIDEO elements. Just like APPLET, these are all elements that distinguish between different kinds of embedded objects. So even though its an HTML 4.01 deprecated element, some explanation of the dropped APPLET would be helpful. Dropped attributes ------------------------- The list of dropped attributes is probably the most significant (other than the added facilities). Some of these attributes are those presentational attributes already deprecated in HTML 4.01. However, there are other ifram related and table related presentational attributes that were not deprecated in HTML 4.01. Many of those may have been superseded by CSS in the last 8 years, but we should try to establish that formerly in our issue-tracking wiki. The dropped attributes list includes: accessibility related attributes, table related attributes, metadata related attributes, the attribute for associating style sheet data; and many others such as the OBJECT/ PARAM related attributes, @name, and some image map and frame related attributes. At the end of this message, I've included an outline of the problem- statements we still need to document. Thanks for your cooperation. Take care, Rob [1]: <http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML> [2]: <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Aug/0108.html> Outline of HTML changes[1] ------------------------- *Justification for Adding Elements *Justification for Adding Attributes Justification for Changing Attributes Made global from almost global Made global only interactive elements: @tabindex Justification for Changing Elements behavioral/interpretive changes *changes in meaning (subtle and not so subtle): B, I, SMALL, HR, STRONG Justification for Dropping Attributes *Accessibility related: @accesskey, @longdesc, @summary, @abbr, *Table related: @axis, @headers, TD@scope *Metadata related: @profile, @scheme, @version, LINK@rev, A@rev *Advisory: SCRIPT@charset, A@charset, LINK@charset, SCRIPT@language *Associating style sheet data: @style *Other: e.g., OBJECT@archive, @classid, @codebase, @codetype, @declare, @standby; PARAM@valuetype, @type; LINK@target, AREA@nohref, A@share, A@coords, @name (except on META and PARAM) Justification for Dropping Presentational Attributes *Not Previously deprecated INPUT and SELECT: @size *Not Previously deprecated table related *Not Previously deprecated iframe related Previously deprecated Justification for Dropping Elements Not Previously deprecated: ACRONYM *Not Previously deprecated: NOSCRIPT Not Previously deprecated Frame related: FRAME, FRAMESET, NOFRAMES *Previously deprecated: APPLET Previously deprecated: DIR, ISINDEX Previously deprecated presentation elements
Received on Tuesday, 14 August 2007 07:16:11 UTC