Re: the market hasn't spoken - it hasn't bothered to listened [was Re: fear of "invisible metadata"]

Henri Sivonen wrote:
> Existing as in "existing in a spec" is not good enough. For something 
> to be considered existing, it needs to be implemented in a way that works.
The list of rather arcane proposals claiming to have accessibility 
implications makes no mention of how many years (decades?) of debate 
followed by an incredibly steep learning curve are necessary to adopt 
any new features in something that will be confusingly called "HTML 
something" yet make the road for those already using the language passable.

The presumption is the one heard so often that if only Sir Tim had spent 
five years (like the Xanadu fantasy) "perfecting" HTML instead of 
getting it out there and in use within a month or so that there would be 
a better world.

Perhaps HTML 4.02 (or some such) might have a chance but HTML 5 - simply 
no way. The changes to WCAG 1 to WCAG 2, which aren't all that radical 
have taken several years (7 I believe) and still not much prospect of 
this last call being *the* last call for suggested changes! How long do 
you think the laundry list of new features you cite will take to achieve 

As to who decides if something (like longdesc) existing in a spec has 
been implemented in a "way that works" is simply very unclear since it 
is clear from this discussion that even though it's not used *much*, it 
still has defendable functionality.

I don't have to recommend skipping the tedium of trying to get agreement 
on HTML 5, time/acrimony will take good care of that: ain't gonna happen 
in our lifetime!


Received on Wednesday, 27 June 2007 15:15:25 UTC