- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 19:30:01 +0100
- To: Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
- Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, public-html@w3.org
Tantek Çelik, Wed, 10 Mar 2010 08:36:27 -0800: > On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:33 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com> wrote: >> On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 16:24:59 +0100, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> >> wrote: >>> >>> On 10.03.2010 16:12, Henri Sivonen wrote: >>>> >>>> This philosophical question could be avoided by stating that documents >>>> labeled "text/html" must be processed according to HTML5. >>>> ... >>> >>> If we did that, we'd have to make sure that this doesn't break existing >>> uses. So statements like >>> >>> "User agents should ignore the profile content attribute on head >>> elements." >>> >>> would need to be fixed. >> >> Isn't that statement true for the majority of existing usage of the profile >> attribute? And therefore a SHOULD requirement is adequate? > > If it's true for the majority implementations of profile attribute, > then a MAY requirement is sufficient. > > No reason to encourage (which is what a "SHOULD" is, an encouragement) > breaking of existing implementations such as GRDDL processors. > > MAY wording here also seems more compatible with allowing user agents > to implement the HTML5 Profile attribute extension. +1 And also, "may" is more consistent with HTML4. HTML4 says that it doesn't define how user agents should handle the profile attribute. Which is equivalent to a "may ignore". -- leif halvard silli
Received on Wednesday, 10 March 2010 18:30:37 UTC