Re: Proposed adaptive image element

On 25/07/2012 13:45, Laura Carlson wrote:
> It would be good to get other opinions. Should specification of
> adaptive images be postponed? What do working group members think are
> the pros and cons of postponing?

HTML5 makes a lot of sense as a stable, edited version of HTML,
that people and HTML generators can target.

But as such, it should be a _subset_ of the facilities implemented in
browsers. Editorial work on HTML5 should be restricted to clarifying and
formalising the moving target which is that WhatWG spec and actual
implementation coverage.

If new features requiring browser implementation are added to HTML5
without being implemented in browsers and without being added to the
WhatWG version then that is going to be confusing for everybody and
makes HTML5 lose its rationale as being a stable snapshot of the ongoing
html development.

So given the model of a continuous development happening at WhatWG
(either thought of as an organisation or as a W3C Community Group) and
development of numbered specifications happening here, I would argue
that almost all new features should go to the continuous "living
standard" version first. (Practically speaking that is likely to be the
quickest root to getting trial implementations in browsers as well).


The Numerical Algorithms Group Ltd is a company registered in England
and Wales with company number 1249803. The registered office is:
Wilkinson House, Jordan Hill Road, Oxford OX2 8DR, United Kingdom.

This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The service is
powered by MessageLabs. 

Received on Wednesday, 25 July 2012 13:12:49 UTC