- From: Eihab Ibrahim <eihabibrahim@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 03:36:34 -0800
- To: Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>
- CC: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On 1/24/2011 1:28 AM, Joshue O Connor wrote: > Hi y'all, > > I just saw Ian Hicksons post on the WHATWG Blog where the HTML 5 > "technology is not versioned and instead we just have a living document > that defines the technology as it evolves". Hi Josh, That's a WHATWG decision and does not really affect the W3C. As far as I know, we still call the next iteration "HTML 5" here. > What this move effectively means is that HTML (5) will be implemented in > a piecemeal manner, with vendors (browser manufacturers/AT makers etc) > cherry picking the parts that they want. It could be argued that this is > the way it _already_ is however as a specification isn't a movable feast > there is more chance for consistency and stability. This current move by > the WHATWG, will mean that discussions that have been going on about how > best to implement accessibility features in HTML 5 could well become > redundant, or unfinished or maybe never even implemented at all. Then follow the W3C's recommendation when it's finished and call your documents or engine W3C HTML5 compliant. > What is implemented will be dependent on where the "living > specification" is at any point in time. If I am flying in a plane, I > don't want to know the engineers were still not in agreement about how > to design the engines after the plane has taken off. > > I think this will mean piecemeal implementation by vendors, with the > caveat that "the spec is in flux so we can only implement the most > stable parts of it" which is a perfect get out clause for a poor user > experience. The plane engine is not a good analogy in this situation. I have yet to author a non-conforming document that seriously injured somebody. In all seriousness, as you have stated before that already is the case even with a numbered version of the spec. Browsers implement the features they deem appropriate and document authors write to the most widely deployed parts of the standard. The way I see it, the WHATWG is (or will become) a forum for the latest developments in HTML, and the W3C will be the standards body you can refer to when you need a specific snapshot in time. > This is a disappointing move, and a retrograde step that could well make > the fine tuning of important accessibility aspects of HTML (5) even harder. To the contrary, I think this is a great move. It will allow the WHATWG to polish and iterate over features in a fast paced and somewhat formal environment, while giving the W3C the opportunity to cherry pick widely deployed features that have been tested for a while. I know that the WHATWG is still very much involved in the W3C's HTML 5 effort, and I doubt that this collaboration will cease to exist in future revisions of the standard. Thanks, Eihab
Received on Monday, 24 January 2011 12:53:35 UTC