Re: <ruby>, etc. in HTML5

On May 27, 2008, at 4:34 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:

> On Tue, 27 May 2008, Robert J Burns wrote:
>> 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.
> There have been a number of major new features since the last draft,
> including seamless iframes, sandboxing, MathML, showModalDialog(),  
> etc.

There's a lot wrong with that statement. First of all, the WG hasn't  
called for the re-implementation of MathML. What I read members of  
this WG say it that they want a way to use any arbitrary vocabulary  
within HTML. You ignored that and instead re-specify what has already  
been specified. Perhaps this goes more to the heart of what I'm  
saying. This draft is not reflective of this WG. Why would we publish  
another version when it still has not changed in a way to reflect the  
opinions of this WG?

And again, none of this is reflected in the revision cited in the  
questionnaire. Finally, I'll say that there are several proposals that  
call for new elements in HTML. These are more what I mean when I say  
BIG. Like VIDEO and AUDIO, it will help with adoption and transition  
if such elements are added to implementations early in the process and  
the WG gets feedback on those implementations. Just as with VIDEO and  
AUDIO, we have serious parsing interoperability problems to deal with  
with the introduction of new elements. Obviously we should avoid new  
elements whenever possible, but that may not always be the case.  
Perhaps even VIDEO and AUDIO could be avoided, but that's a separate  

>> Developers are anxious to begin experimental implementation of HTML5
>> features
> Assuming you mean Web browser implementors, I am in contact with most
> major developers and have been coordinating with their desires for  
> what to
> implement. If you or anyone knows of any browser vendors who are not  
> in
> direct contact with me, please have them contact me directly so that  
> I can
> help them. I have tried to be very responsive to implementor requests.

Yes I mean web browser implementors/developers. However, Ian, you are  
no coordinating with the browser implementors as you say. You  
coordinate only with those you know, or those you're friends with (or  
who knows what criterion). The others you ignore.

Take care,

Received on Tuesday, 27 May 2008 21:26:28 UTC