- From: Nicholas Chase <nchase@earthlink.net>
- Date: Mon, 07 May 2007 14:09:33 -0400
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- CC: John Foliot <foliot@wats.ca>, 'Dan Connolly' <connolly@w3.org>, 'Anne van Kesteren' <annevk@opera.com>, www-html@w3.org, public-html@w3.org
Jonas Sicking wrote: > Personally I'm very interested in how people use HTML4 today, because I > think largely they are going to keep using HTML5 the same way. If we > propose something that goes against what people are doing today, I > suspect it won't be used nearly as much as if we suggest something that > aids and enhances their current use practices. Granted, that is just a > hunch and I might be wrong. I haven't been following the entire debate -- it's been a long time since I had time to read every single message that comes though, unfortunately -- so I'll apologize in advance if I touch on something that's been worked to death. Having said that, I disagree. People who want to do things like they did in HTML4 will just keep using HTML4. But HTML5 has the potential to open up a whole NEW way of doing things FOR THOSE WHO WANT TO USE IT. If HTML5 abandons the constraints that HTML4 puts on it in order to enable things like easier tool integration, we might actually see things like older people -- which, by the way, the original HTML generation is quickly joining the ranks of, BTW -- using tools to create HTML pages that include intelligence in terms of semantics (little "s"). I'm not saying to break everything. I remember how we all flipped out over XHTML and the simple requirement of well-formed tags (OMG!!!). But if HTML5 can be presented in a way that simply lets both versions run side-by-side, so those who want to can use the new version, those that don't have a stroke trying to update for new browsers, then I think we're in good shape. But at that point, people are only going to use HTML5 IF THERE IS A COMPELLING REASON. In other words, just coming out with a new version for the sake of it isn't going to get anybody to use it. There's got to be a good REASON, such as enabling tools that can spit out clean code with microformats attached so that better searching is enabled. (There's a chicken-and-egg for you; nobody's going to put in the effort to use microformats and other semantic technologies until there's a good reason, like better searching, but search engines won't bother until there's a decent amount of content to index.) So maybe before we start beating each other up over the little things, we should answer the question of "Just what are we trying to accomplish FROM THE USER'S STANDPOINT?" ---- Nick
Received on Monday, 7 May 2007 18:10:06 UTC