- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 15:02:40 +0300
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
On Aug 31, 2009, at 14:46, Julian Reschke wrote: > Henri Sivonen wrote: >> On Aug 31, 2009, at 14:38, Julian Reschke wrote: >>> Henri Sivonen wrote: >>>> ... >>>> Now I'm confused by your argument. Why do *recipients* need >>>> anything more than the processing requirements given by HTML5? >>>> ... >>> >>> Not everything is a processing requirement (for instance, when an >>> element carries certain semantics which do not actually affect >>> processing in a UA). >> What are semantics that don't trigger any observable processing in >> any UA good for? When you say "recipient", do you mean a person or >> a piece of software? > > It might trigger observable processing in *some* recipients. People or software? > Are you trying to say that we should remove all "semantic" elements > if they do not have precise UA processing requirements? I'm trying to say that "semantics" that don't trigger any observable effects in any class of UA are mere styling/scripting hooks, and mere styling/scripting hooks are an authoring-side convention--not a something that implementors of receiving software need to be concerned with beyond supporting generic styling/scripting mechanisms. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Monday, 31 August 2009 12:03:23 UTC