Re: ISSUE-53: mediatypereg - suggest closing on 2009-09-03

Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Aug 2009, Mark Baker wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Ian Hickson<ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
>>>> Well, in that case HTML5 is unsuitable as the *only* specification
>>>> referenced by the text/html media type registration.
>>> I disagree.
>> Julian is correct.  The registration for text/html needs to include 
>> sufficient information to allow legacy documents served with that type 
>> to retain their meaning.
> 
> The HTML5 spec does have sufficient information to allow legacy documents 
> served with that type to be processed in a fashion that retains their 
> meaning, as far as I am aware. If I have missed something, please let me 
> know.

You keep saying that, but pointing things out again and again doesn't 
appear to work.

"Retaining the meaning" and "to be processed in a fashion that retains 
their meaning" are not the same thing.

For the former, the specification must define what the element/attribute 
means. Usually, that means more than describing what a UA needs to do 
with it. head/@profile and meta/@scheme are examples that immediately 
come to mind; I'm sure there's more.

BR, Julian