- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2010 15:49:45 +0100
- To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- CC: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>, HTMLwg WG <public-html@w3.org>
Henri Sivonen wrote: > On Jan 4, 2010, at 19:48, Julian Reschke wrote: > >> For instance, an enterprise portal might be a "controlled environment". > > I understand "controlled environment" in standards parlance to mean that one party controls all pieces participating is a system (parties to communication in the case of protocols and formats). That's a different understanding :-). I'm not claiming mine is right, but this shows that we do not even agree on terminology here. > As I understand it, the whole point of implementing enterprise portals using Web technologies is to enable the use of off-the-shelf client software (browsers). Would the way the off-the-shelf client software reacts to doctypes be "controlled" by the enterprise? Yes, the point of enterprise portal is being able to use off-the-shelf browsers. But that doesn't preclude that there are *other* UAs, such as company-specific search engines, that take advantage of the fact that the content indeed is "controlled"; for instance by using meta/@name=keywords or DC-HTML formatted metadata (both of these are currently invalid in HTML5). > Would some kind of content production and ingest into portal workflow be a "controlled environment"? > > What's the controlled environment here where both HTML producers and consumers are controlled by the controller? I think the important point here is that *some* consumers are generic, some consumers might have proprietary extensions (think company-specific Firefox extensions), and also there may be additional consumers that are not generic. All of them should be able to consume the same content, and it should be possible to make this content valid HTML5. Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 5 January 2010 14:50:25 UTC