- From: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>
- Date: Sun, 06 May 2007 12:25:56 -0400
- To: Philip & Le Khanh <Philip-and-LeKhanh@Royal-Tunbridge-Wells.Org>
- Cc: www-html@w3.org,public-html@w3.org
We disagree, but at least I now know how and why we disagree. I have found some of this discussion quite enlightening. I will now know better than you try to argue with you about the remit of this group or the presentation/semantic dividing line. At 12:07 PM 5/6/2007 +0100, Philip & Le Khanh wrote: >Maciej Stachowiak wrote: >But the remit of this group is /not/ to define how extant >HTML should be processed, but rather to define how the >next iteration of HTML should be written (and processed). >And in so doing, the group should be informed by the >errors of the past. The received wisdom at the time >that the HTML 4.01 spec. was published was that the >language should be primarily semantic rather than >presentational : it is my belief (and that of some other >members of this list) that the WHATWG failed to >ascribe sufficient weight to that wisdom, and instead >reverted to an earlier presentational paradigm, with >its concomitant loss of precision and accessibility. > >Philip Taylor
Received on Sunday, 6 May 2007 16:50:38 UTC