- From: Bill Mason <w3c@accessibleinter.net>
- Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 11:57:23 -0700
- To: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
bhopgood@brookes.ac.uk wrote: > But HTML 4 is the only W3C Recommendation that can be regarded as current > assuming you don't start from XHTML 1.0 Strict, which would be a better > starting point. Because? And if you were to start from XHTML 1 (which is clearly not going to be the case), how do you account for the charter requirement "taking into account legacy implementations"? > > If you don't start from HTML 4 then you have to include the 30 or 40 > elements that appeared in earlier versions of HTML and the 50 or 60 > elements that appeared in non-standard versions. We will be here until > 2100 if we rehash all that old history just because in 1991 some person > produced a web page using one of those elements and it still exists on the > Web. One web page with one old element would not constitute "HTML as practiced on the web". > > Tim put up a page in 1990 which included a whole set of elements that > never appeared in any of the versions of HTML. Do we need to discuss those > as well? They also would not constitute HTML as practiced on the web. > > Bob > > ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- > Subject: Re: toward W3C Working Draft: design principles? spec? other? > (survey) > From: "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com> > Date: Mon, June 4, 2007 10:58 am > To: "Henrik Dvergsdal" <henrik.dvergsdal@hibo.no> > "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 11:27:21 +0200, Henrik Dvergsdal > <henrik.dvergsdal@hibo.no> wrote: >> Does this mean you think we should forget all about HTML4? Don't you >> think that we should be able to state the reasons for changes vs. HTML4 >> with use cases, research etc.? > > I don't think we should assume HTML4 is perfect. The legacy we have is > HTML as practiced on the web, not HTML4. It probably make sense to analyse > features in that light (apart from normally reviewing them). > > -- Bill Mason Accessible Internet w3c@accessibleinter.net http://accessibleinter.net/
Received on Monday, 4 June 2007 18:57:40 UTC