- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 22:41:49 +0000 (UTC)
On Mon, 29 Nov 2010, Charles Pritchard wrote, in part (as, in the interests of making progress, I have not cited or responded to sections of the e-mail that did not include actionable feedback): > On 11/27/2010 2:50 AM, Ian Hickson wrote: > > On Fri, 26 Nov 2010, Charles Pritchard wrote: > > > > > > I want to suggestion a reason for this impasse: the WHATWG intends > > > to produce a scene-graph specification. Other activities are out of > > > scope. > > > > I'm not sure what you really mean by "scene-graph specification", so > > it's hard to comment on that specifically. Historically, and still > > today, the HTML language and its associated APIs are generally > > intended to primarily convey semantics (meaning, as opposed to > > presentation) so that they can be rendered in a media-independent way > > on any device. > > The HTML language has become even more semantic, less presentational, as > CSS+SVG profiles are enhanced. > > These three sections of the HTML5 specs seem out of scope: "Loading > Webpages", "Web application APIs" and "Communication" I must admit surprise to the idea that loading webpages is not in scope of the spec that defines the format used for web pages. :-) The HTML spec is primarily an API spec, describing how a DOM tree can be manipulated from script and how it must react to user interaction. So the APIs seem entirely in scope. > Unfortunately, contenteditable is less accessible to users than it > should be. I'd like to see that addressed. Could you elaborate on how it is less accessible than it should be? -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 1 March 2011 14:41:49 UTC