- 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