Re: some thoughts on objections to publishing ""HTML 5 differences from HTML 4"

> Do you think there's a need to go into more detail than that?

yes I do, that is why I proposed

in "1.1. Open Issues"

add to current text

"The headers, longdesc and summary attributes."


To make it perfectly clear that the dropping or omission or whatever
of these attributes is an open issue.


Furthermore I was going to propose in my previous email, (that i sent
accidently before it was complete.)

That a sentence be inserted in 3.6. Dropped Attributes

"Note: The decision to drop of some of the attributes in this section
is currently being debated by the working group. As a consequence one
or more may be allowed in HTML 5"

Again to ensure that the disputed status of headers, longdesc and
summary attributes is clearly recorded within the document.

On 29/06/07, ciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
>
> On Jun 29, 2007, at 1:22 PM, Steven Faulkner wrote:
>
> >
> >> But I don't see any suggested text for the proposed rationale.
> >
> > The rationale for dropping the headers,longdesc and summary attributes
> > was presumably formulated by the WHAT WG when the decisions to drop
> > these attributes was made. I would like to see the rationale formally
> > recorded in the differences document, but if that is not possible,
> > then at least I propose that
> >
> > in "1.1. Open Issues"
> > add to current text
> > The headers, longdesc and summary attributes.
>
> These are included in "Details of accessibility and media-
> independence features." (The more general description would also
> include things like alt, whether there should be a nicer way to make
> an image with full markup fallback, etc). Do you think there's a need
> to go into more detail than that?
>
> Regards,
> Maciej
>
>


-- 
with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG Europe
Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium

www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org

Received on Friday, 29 June 2007 22:16:46 UTC