- From: Dailey, David P. <david.dailey@sru.edu>
- Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 09:31:53 -0400
- To: "Terje Bless" <link@pobox.com>, "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>
On Tue 5/1/2007 8:54 AM Terje Bless wrote: <author="TB" tagstyle="fun"> A few days ago I speculated on IRC that the text, as written, exposes a "browser" point of view that many seem to find objectionable. I wonder if the different prose point of view, of essentially the same text, illustrated below would address some of those concerns. Original: [[[ Browsers implementing the new version of HTML should still be able to handle existing content. Ideally, it should be possible to process web documents and applications via an HTML5 implementation even if they were authored against older implementations and do not specifically request HTML5 processing. ]]] Modified: [[[ The specification of [HTML5] should not make it impossible, or inordinately difficult, for User Agents implementing [HTML5] to continue supporting existing content. Ideally, web documents and applications authored against older implementations, and which do not specifically request HTML5 processing, should be possible to process in an HTML5 implementation. ]]] </author> Having a similar purpose in mind http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Apr/1735.html I offered a similar attempt to degauss the phrasing: DD: "New versions of HTML should enable user agents to handle existing content. Where possible, documents and applications which work properly in older UA's should not malfunction under new versions, particularly in cases that the content has become common practice in multiple environments." Someone suggested that since it is a wiki, we could just change it. How about you go first? cheers, David Dailey
Received on Tuesday, 1 May 2007 13:31:43 UTC