[whatwg] ---

On Nov 4, 2008, at 10:07 AM, Pentasis wrote:

> Ok, let's try to get the "heat" off of this discussion. Let me try  
> to explain it.
> The HTML spec consists of several parts. Some of these parts are  
> indeed browsers spcific, like the DOM, the rendering engine, etc.
> But the other part is pure semantics. It is about marking up content.
> I agree that the first part should be done by UA vendors, but I  
> strongly oppose that the second part is done by them as well. That  
> should be done by linguistics, typographs, and people who have to  
> actually create the content.
> The emphasis of the HTML5 spec (but also the XHTML2 and HTML4) lies  
> on the browser part. I understand, after all that is your job and I  
> am sure you are all very capable of that. But please, let the actual  
> markup language itself be defined by others who are more capable of  
> doing that.

The HTML5 spec is open to feedback from linguists, typographers and  
content creators. I would agree we should particularly give  
consideration to people with those backgrounds with regards to issues  
of semantics. On the other hand, there is not total freedom here  
because some choices will result in conflict with Web compatibility or  
with practical implementation concerns.

Do you have any specific concerns about the current spec? That would  
be more useful than criticizing the design process in the abstract.


Received on Tuesday, 4 November 2008 11:45:32 UTC