W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2010

Re: AuthConfReq: Presentational Markup

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:29:58 -0700
Message-ID: <63df84f1003301629r58afc0f3m7270b9ac862f7c18@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
My personal opinion, which I think I stated a long time ago when Rob
Sayre first brought up this topic, is that I'd prefer to get rid of
all the authoring conformance requirements.

There simply is too much controversy for too little value to make this
worth it for us. Instead we should leave it up to lint tools to create
best practices.

This not only saves us a bunch of work, it also gives lint tool
authors more freedom to develop whichever practices that they deem
suitable. And it supports the multiple conformance classes use case
that Larry mentions since different lint tool authors could target
different audiences.

If I work for a company that simply *hates* the way that <span>
elements are spelled, they can develop their own lint tool and verify
their own documents using that. They could even create an automatic
spider that verifies document and sends an automatic pink slip to any
employee that publishes a document with more than 15 <span> elements
on the internal cake responsibility rotation intranet website
(probably better to use some sort of three-strikes policy though,
simply firing someone without warning seems harsh, and probably
illegal in most of Europe).

/ Jonas
Received on Tuesday, 30 March 2010 23:30:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:00 UTC