- From: Michael(tm) Smith <mike@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2010 21:15:45 +0900
- To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, 2010-02-01 16:30 -0500: > Some more feedback on the H:TML document: > > One of our devs was wondering how he could use these new elements > without a clear recommended fallback plan for many of them that could > potentially mess up the page layout. So, for example, how does one do > proper fallback for PROGRESS, VIDEO or METER. It may take years for > browsers that don't support these elements to stop being supported, and > most developers will create fallback code for the older browsers. Providing that kind of guidance is intentionally out of scope for the H:TML doc. The author edition of the HTML5 spec itself does provide some - http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec-author-view/ > Having to come up with workarounds would be fine, because that is what > he is used to doing on a weekly basis with cross-browser issues, but it > would be nice if the fallback plan for each element was explained > clearly to web developers (and browser manufacturers). I personally think that there are a number of places in the HTML5 spec where it attempts to provide more usage guidance than is appropriate for a technical spec. I think that in general that specs should essentially be specifications of conformance requirements and not usage guides, and I think attempting to make a spec be both specifications and usage guide is a design error. So, anyway, I think that the guidance your dev was looking for is something better handled in a separate document whose specific purpose it to be a how-to/tutorial, not a technical specification. > He also said that he has no idea how to use the RUBY element, or what a > "ruby annotation" was, nor how to use it correctly by looking at the > H:TML document. That problem I think I can help a bit with by adding examples for each element, which is something I still plan to to. --Mike -- Michael(tm) Smith http://people.w3.org/mike
Received on Sunday, 7 March 2010 12:15:54 UTC