- From: Robert J Burns <rob@robburns.com>
- Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 00:27:34 +0000
- To: "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com>
- Cc: "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>
Hi Anne, On May 26, 2008, at 6:27 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > > It seems Ian didn't e-mail public-html@w3.org about the recent > addition of <ruby>, <rt>, and <rp> to the HTML5 draft specification: > > http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=1703&to=1704 > http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/section-text-level.html#the-ruby > > Maybe this reduces the concern from Robert Burns somewhat. Not really. The draft we were voting on is version 1.822[1] or later version. That version has no ruby section in it (though ruby is included in the parsing algorithm, but I think that's been there for a while). Now, the "or later version" language opens up the possibility that it could be tacked on in a rushed way, but I don't think that's a good way to get the next draft out of the door. Secondly, ruby was just an example I was giving. There have been many other large proposals made in the WG, that have gotten short shrift and need to be addressed in the draft. Developers are anxious to begin experimental implementation of HTML5 features and I think focussing on getting the big ideas out the door is more important than all of the little tweaks to the language that will inevitably happen with feedback and in time. To facilitate the process it's important to get the big things in the draft as an indication to implementation developers where the draft is headed. Take care, Rob [1]: <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/html5/spec/Overview.html?rev=1.822 >
Received on Tuesday, 27 May 2008 00:28:17 UTC