Re: Getting beyond the ping pong match


> All the examples that you gave could be solved by defining 'search' for
> the form element only, which would be a good enough context. I'm not
> sure why WA1 defines it for aside, body, p, section and span.

Wow! Are you really suggesting that we just keep hacking the language
until it does whatever it is that you want it to do? It might be worth
taking a step back here and looking at what is being presented. The
argument so far is that we take something that is clearly flawed and
inconsistent, and try to address its limitations by adding more
inconsistencies. Hacking does have its place, but this is getting out
of hand!

What I find most ironic is that in one thread we have people arguing
that HTML 5 is built on the idea of backwards compatibility and
graceful degradation, and in another thread we find that we can no
longer use any class values that we like. As it happens, HTML 5
doesn't degrade gracefully anyway since it adds new elements, but
graceful degradation as much as possible is still a commendable goal;
mandating semantics for already existing class values doesn't even
hold to this goal.



  Mark Birbeck, formsPlayer | +44 (0) 20 7689 9232 |

  standards. innovation.

Received on Monday, 7 May 2007 13:59:53 UTC