- From: Philip Taylor (Webmaster) <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
- Date: Thu, 03 May 2007 18:22:01 +0100
- To: public-html@w3.org, www-html@w3.org
Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > Will you agree that the spec defines a narrower (and perhaps cleaner) > language for documents than "everything on the web ever", even if you > disagree with some of the details of what is allowed? Of course (for example, it omits "marquee"). Unfortunately that same spec. defines a wider (and distinctly dirtier) language for documents than HTML 4.01 Strict, and /that/ is the issue with which I take exception. The charter calls for "A language evolved from HTML4 for describing the semantics of documents and applications on the World Wide Web". The language as proposed by the WHATWG is more closely evolved from HTML 3.2, pays lip service to "describing the semantics", and places far too much emphasis on "describing the processing of extant documents and applications ...". Philip Taylor
Received on Thursday, 3 May 2007 17:22:26 UTC