- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 03:56:31 -0700 (PDT)
- To: HTMLwg WG <public-html@w3.org>
- Cc: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
"Henri Sivonen" <hsivonen@iki.fi> wrote: > Personally, I'd be more inclined to allow more > interoperably-implemented presentational pre-existing markup features > as valid to allow authors to use an HTML5 validator as a development > aid when adding HTML5 features to pre-existing content that has > interoperably supported legacy cruft in it. Based on IRC discussion, I feel I should clarify: I'm not suggesting that all interoperably-implemented presentational pre-existing features should be valid as a blanket policy. However, I think it would be worthwhile to allow things that are used so much that not allowing them makes validators too noisy for use with legacy markup--but only when the harm arising from the use of legacy markup features is directed mostly to the maintainer of the markup and not to the users. Examples: Tweaking table borders in CSS vs. tweaking them in presentational attributes is probably an issue where the harm is directed at the page author. Using <font size> most likely means that <h1>, <h2>, etc. aren't being used, which is a case where the harm is directed at users of non-conventional browsing software. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Friday, 26 March 2010 10:57:04 UTC