- From: Andrew Sidwell <takkaria@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 00:05:04 +0100
- To: Philip & Le Khanh <Philip-and-LeKhanh@Royal-Tunbridge-Wells.Org>
- CC: W3C List <public-html@w3.org>
Philip & Le Khanh wrote: > Maciej Stachowiak wrote: >> >> On May 1, 2007, at 8:19 AM, Gareth Hay wrote: >>> To address the point I do understand, I agree, no one is perfect, but >>> are you really suggest something akin to using a C compiler to take >>> some pseudo code input and attempt to produce executable code, by >>> hook or crook? >> >> A C compiler runs on the developer's machine. This is different from >> content produced by one party and consumed by many others using a >> variety of tools, where there is more benefit to being lenient in what >> you accept. > > That is exactly the situation that obtains with "C" programs. One > person writes code, others attempt to compile it using their > compiler, their libraries, their operating system ... A pretty > good parallel to the way HTML is produced and consumed, in fact. C has well-defined error handling for when built-in functions are called with bad input. There is no such definition at the moment for HTML (outside of WA1)/ Also, C code often has to fallback to the lowest common denominator: if you want to use (for example) the `inline` keyword on a wide variety of compilers, you need to have fallback for implementations which do not have that keyword. Backwards compatibility is a big concern unless you control all aspects of the system your code will compile and run on. I think this might be stretching the analogy a bit, but I think it was stretched to begin with. Andrew Sidwell
Received on Tuesday, 1 May 2007 23:05:02 UTC