- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:51:51 +0200
- To: "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>
- Cc: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>, "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
On Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:35:08 +0200, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org> wrote: > Yes, I agree that the HTML5 parser is a far more suitable > version-independent parsing reference than anything in 4.01 or > earlier. And it was my hope that HTML 5 could be the sole referenced > HTML specification from the updated media type registration for this > reason. Unfortunately, it's missing enough other things - as has been > discussed here - to make that goal problematic. To me the complaints so far have been very vague. E.g. "the semantics of the schema attribute are not defined". It's not at all clear to me why they need to be defined and what the measurable effect would be if they were. I'm sure that if the issue was explained a little better it would be easier to determine if we simply disagree or just misunderstand each other. -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Monday, 31 August 2009 15:52:40 UTC