- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2010 10:34:05 -0400
- To: Kornel Lesiński <kornel@geekhood.net>
- CC: public-html@w3.org
On 03/28/2010 09:21 AM, Kornel Lesiński wrote: > On 28.03.2010, at 13:24, Sam Ruby wrote: >> >> My central thesis is that banning is not the appropriate mechanism >> for markup that works interoperably and is widely and willfully >> used. You are free to campaign against cheeseburgers, but are not >> free to outright ban their sale. > > HTML 5 intends to make all markup interoperable. One can argue that > every markup is willfully used. Following that path, > validators/conformance checkers are completely unnecessary. HTML 5 > validator could respond to every document with "Congratulations! Your > document is... meh, whatever!" Once HTML 4 browsers disappear, there > will be no practical difference between conforming and non-conforming > documents. I believe that we can agree that http://www.craigslist.com/ is non-conforming: http://html5.validator.nu/?doc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.craigslist.com%2F http://intertwingly.net/stories/2010/03/21/www.craigslist.com http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.craigslist.com%2F In particular, the incorrect encoding declaration and stray <p> tag are items we can agree are non-conforming. > I think bar for conformance should be much higher, and take good > practices (accessibility, usability, maintainability) into account. > Those authors who don't care about such criteria can continue to > ignore them, their markup will be interoperable anyway. > > It's easy to find exceptions where "banned" elements are harmless, > but this shouldn't be excuse to allow all uses of them, including > those which are harmful. No one is suggesting that we allow markup that is harmful. > I want to campaign for markup I consider of good quality, and I would > prefer if that would be the same as conforming HTML 5. HTML 5 spec > and conformance checkers will have a lot of authority, and it will be > very difficult to campaign against them (i.e. it's difficult to > convince people that markup which validates is not good). I agree that http://www.craigslist.com/ could be improved by the increased use of CSS. But I will assert that that is a willful choice that the authors of that site have made. - Sam Ruby
Received on Sunday, 28 March 2010 14:34:44 UTC