Re: Should we Publish a Language Specification?

• From: Dean Edridge <dean@dean.org.nz>
• Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 03:14:01 +1300
• To: "Philip TAYLOR (Ret'd)" <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
• Cc: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
• Message-id: <492570A9.3070102@dean.org.nz>

Philip TAYLOR (Ret'd) wrote:
>
> To summarise my position, Dean, I am not
> arguing in favour of a second authoring
> specification :

The spec that Mike has drafted is essentially an "authoring 
specification". Several members of the public have said that's how they 
perceive it:

quoting: 
http://www.webdirections.org/blog/html5-markup-language-first-draft-published/
> ..In essence, it’s a web authors guide to HTML.

Philip TAYLOR continues:
> I am arguing in favour
> of a first, normative,

If it is normative then it is going to conflict with what the spec says. 
If it's not normative it's going to clash with the authoring guide.

Philip TAYLOR continues:
> ...language specification,
> towards which Mike's draft is an superb start.

I don't actually think that Mike should have started it.

-- 
Dean Edridge

Received on Thursday, 20 November 2008 14:14:37 UTC