- From: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 12:03:25 +0200
- To: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
- CC: public-html@w3.org
On 16/09/2014 17:14 , Daniel Glazman wrote: > On 16/09/2014 16:58, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote: >> With a risk of going off track a bit, I think it will be valuable to >> make sure that www.w3.org/TR/html/ still points to our best >> understanding of what HTML is. With a new module approach and the >> various extension specifications, one won't be able to look at a single >> spec to understand what constitutes HTML. One suggestion was to >> republish the entire HTML5 specification as a set of modules in the >> immediate future and make sure that future modules are clear on which >> HTML5 modules they intend to replace. As such, /TR/html would always >> point to the most relevant modules and still present a complete set. > > Not sure /TR/html helps. Let me remind you W3C owns domain html.org, > unused... Where it is does not matter all that much so long as it is there. In talking to a bunch of people about the CSS approach, it surfaced that while they almost unanimously liked the CSS modular approach many complained that it was "hard to find stuff". One additional complaint was that it was hard to figure our what parts of CSS 2.1 had been superseded and which hadn't. These are problems we'd like to address, and using /TR/html (or whatever) sounds like a good plan for that. Point to all that's part of HTML (in a loose sense), don't bother with calling it any specific version number, update it relatively frequently, and include tables that make it easy for people to start there in order to find all elements, attributes, interfaces, etc. Maybe a bit like /TR/css/ but made to work? (Details on why that was abandoned would be useful by the way.) -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Wednesday, 17 September 2014 10:03:36 UTC