W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > May 2007

Re: Rethinking HTML 5 (Was: Re: Semicolon after entities)

From: Philip Taylor (Webmaster) <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
Date: Tue, 01 May 2007 18:29:48 +0100
Message-ID: <4637790C.8070104@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
To: public-html@w3.org

Jeff Cutsinger wrote:

>> And what does it really mean ? That a document
>> written in HTML5 will display  "correctly" in
>> browsers that are HTML5-unaware ?
> Yes.

If the browsers are HTML5-unaware, then their
behaviour in the presence of (new) HTML5 elements
is unpredictable to say the least.  The probability
that such a docment will display "correctly"
(no matter how you choose to define "correctly")
is vanishingly small.

> You are incorrect. The WHATWG specs as defined are (loosely speaking) a
> superset of HTML 4 (in that they add useful features) 

Useful in the opinion of some : the usefulness of several
of these "features" is debatable to say the least.

> Can we please move on? 

If by "move on", you mean "will [I] blindly accept things
with which I disagree ?", then I am afraid the answer must
be "no".  The purpose of this forum is to encourage debate,
and debate is pointless if there is only one point of view.

> Really, if you're so stuck on this, the WHATWG
> standard allows you to use XML! Or use XHTML 1.0 or 1.1 with the
> application/xhtml+xml mimetype. Or try out XHTML 2.0.

No thank you, I want to use HTML5, where HTML5 is derived
from HTML 4.01 Strict rather than from something that looks
more like HTML 3.2 as modified by a committee.

Philip Taylor
Received on Tuesday, 1 May 2007 17:30:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:20 UTC