- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 15:01:07 -0500
- To: "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 2:45 PM, Michael(tm) Smith <mike@w3.org> wrote: > It's intentional that the current draft does not attempt to do > that. It is in part an attempts to keep the scope as tightly > constrained as possible by not dealing at all with how to consume > HTML content. I understand. The draft is quite clear about that. >> For that to happen, the HTML 5 parser specification would need >> to be included. > > If the HTML5 parser specification to be included here it would > end up being a different spec. For one, it would require also > bringing in or normatively referencing other parts of the HTML5 > draft that the parser specification depends on. As it is currently > scoped, this "producers" spec does not have those > dependencies / need for normative references. I don't believe there should be a "producers spec" and a "consumers spec". I believe there should be a single "language spec" - in the same vein as HTML 4, CSS, SVG, etc.. What you've got is closer to a language specification than the current HTML 5 WD, but it falls short in the way I previously described. I understand that a language spec wasn't your intention, but that's the best way forward IMO. Mark.
Received on Thursday, 13 November 2008 20:01:48 UTC