- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 12:10:46 -0700
- To: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>
- Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On May 1, 2007, at 7:14 AM, Murray Maloney wrote: > > At 02:54 PM 5/1/2007 +0200, Terje Bless wrote: >> 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. >> [...] >> 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. >> ]]] > > Sorry. This doesn't help me at all. It still speaks to user agents. > > HTML 5 will be a superset of all previous incarnations of > HTML, > whether as W3C specification, user agent instantiations, or > instances of HTML documents on the web and on intranets. > (As a result, user agents which can accommodate HTML 5 should > be able to accommodate earlier versions of HTML.) > > Does that say what needs to be said? I don't think it does, if you take "superset" strictly. Since past specs and past implementations are in conflict with each other, I believe the requirement as you have stated it is a logical impossibility. Regards, Maciej
Received on Tuesday, 1 May 2007 19:11:05 UTC