- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 00:35:46 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>
- Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Tue, 11 Nov 2008, Chris Wilson wrote: > > I'd mentioned once or twice that I thought the text for section 1.4.4 - > "Relationship [of HTML5] to XUL, Flash, Silverlight, and other > proprietary UI languages" - should be revised, as it characterizes these > languages as "UI" languages (which isn't appropriate except in XUL's > case), and is rather offensively worded. Here is proposed text to > replace the current text of this section. Comments welcome, of course. How are Flash and Silverlight not UI languages? > Title should be revised to: > > Relationship to XUL, Flash, Silverlight, and other proprietary languages > > This specification is independent of various vendor markup languages > such as XUL, Flash, Silverlight and others. As an openly developed > language, HTML5 provides non-proprietary solutions to many of the same > problems, but is not guaranteed to be a replacement for any or all of > the features of these languages. This doesn't mention the risk of vendor lock-in and the benefit of vendor neutrality, which are two of the most important points made in the current paragraph, IMHO. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2008 00:36:21 UTC