W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > November 2008

[whatwg] Add 'type' attribute to <mark>

From: Nils Dagsson Moskopp <nils-dagsson-moskopp@dieweltistgarnichtso.net>
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2008 00:28:13 +0100
Message-ID: <1225754893.14302.19.camel@12345luise>
Am Sonntag, den 02.11.2008, 19:49 +0200 schrieb Pentasis:
> I had my doubts when I heard browser vendors were going to do the next 
> standard. But I gave them the benefit of the doubt, I had high hopes as 
> well. I read both the X/HTML5 and the XHTML2 spec over the past two months, 
> and if I was given a choice (but that is personal ofcourse) I would choose 
> XHTML2 without a second thought.
XHTML2 has some points going for it, for example the <h> element,
removal of legacy elements or the "any object can be a link" @href
attribute. However, it has it inconsistencies, too - I would be careful
with attributing that to the makers of the spec. Fact: (X)HTML5 at least
seems to have a more open process and that means: You can probably work
on it.

> The X/HTML spec reads too much like a law and leave little or no room for the creative 
> designer minds that eventually need to work with it.
Creative designer minds working on rendering engines and DOM
properties ? Sorry, but one "creative" vendor (MS) apparently is enough
to throw the web off balance ... and no reasonable sane person wants to
repeat that.

> I am slowely but seriously contemplating organising the designer world and 
> creating our own standards. these browsers have been nothing but troubles 
> since the first day of the internet.
Wait, what ?

> First a "war", then it was slow and bad 
> implementation of standards, and now it is creating a new standard which is 
> unusable in a practical sense for designers.(and it won't guarantee anyone 
> that it will mean all browsers will be standards compliant, so what is the 
> point?)
Yeah, what's the point of standards if one can just ignore them ? Maybe
heavily armed web mercenaries tort^H^H^H^H^H easing the vendors into
compliance would be a better way to go ?

> As a designer all I want is a standard that enables me to design and 
> to comply to usability, accessibility etc. without having to worry about UAs 
> breaking or doing things differently just because someone thought: "wow, 
> look we can do that...how gimmicky. Let us implement it".
Then go burn Redmond. Send cash to Opera. Or Mozilla. Wait, Google does
the last thing already. Seriously, bother someone else.

> Browser vendors should equally comply to standards and simply make browsers 
> user friendly. Neither designers nor UA manufacturers have any business of 
> writing specs!
Separation of powers, eh ? I'm gonna make my own web standard, with
hookers and blackjack ! In fact, forget the web standard ...

> Well, sorry for the rant, but this is just another sad example I think of 
> free market and free speech being abused.
Thing is, we have nearly infinite resources on the web. Go make your
standard. The only concept I know of that has "abusing free speech" is
using free speech to abolish it (e.g. [GODWIN DETECTED]).


Now GTFO my web,
-- 
Nils Dagsson Moskopp
<http://dieweltistgarnichtso.net>
Received on Monday, 3 November 2008 15:28:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:07 UTC