W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > May 2013

Re: [whatwg] HTML differences from HTML4 document updated

From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 06 May 2013 14:12:05 +0200
To: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org, "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>
Message-ID: <op.wwnv6fr6idj3kv@simons-macbook-pro.local>
On Fri, 03 May 2013 18:20:51 +0200, Jukka K. Korpela <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>  
wrote:

> 2013-05-03 18:37, Simon Pieters wrote:
>
>> The past few days I've been working on updating the HTML differences
>> from HTML4 document, which is a deliverable of the W3C HTML WG but is
>> now also available as a version with the WHATWG style sheet:
>>
>> http://html-differences.whatwg.org/
>
> I think you should start from making the title sensible. "HTML  
> differences from HTML4" is too esoteric even in this context.

Do you have a suggestion?


> Besides, the spelling is "HTML 4". Especially if you think HTML 4 is  
> ancient history, retain the historical spelling.

I don't think this is of particular importance.


On Fri, 03 May 2013 20:10:58 +0200, Xaxio Brandish  
<xaxiobrandish@gmail.com> wrote:

> The important thing (IMHO) to remember here regarding the title is that
> HTML released two subversions of HTML 4, HTML 4.0 [2] and HTML 4.01 [3].

Three, actually.

I don't see what's important about that, though.

> The document must be intended as a differentiation between the entire
> version of HTML4, since it does not specify a specific subversion to  
> diff?
> However, it links to the HTML 4.01 specification in the "References"
> section.  If this is *only* a diff between HTML 4.01 and the living
> standard, perhaps the title should then be "HTML differences from HTML
> 4.01" so that the document has additional meaning.  If there are
> differences between HTML 4.0, HTML 4.01, *and* HTML5 in the same section  
> of
> the document, those should probably be appropriately marked.

HTML 4.01 is intended. The differences between revisions of HTML4 is out  
of scope.


On Fri, 03 May 2013 20:53:21 +0200, Xaxio Brandish  
<xaxiobrandish@gmail.com> wrote:

> I see what you're saying.
>
> The document title on the WHATWG site is titled based on the W3C document
> [1].  However, I see no reason to keep the same title structure; it will  
> be
> easy to find either way.

The W3C version will have the same title.

> In that case, "Differences between HTML and HTML4" sounds nice as well.

That doesn't seem to address Jukka's concern.

> The only reservation I have is that the "from" preposition connotates  
> that
> HTML follows HTML4 (which it does, in a manner of speaking), whereas the
> "between" preposition implies a comparison among similar but equal ideas.

That suggests "from" is better. :-)


On Fri, 03 May 2013 21:17:34 +0200, Jukka K. Korpela <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>  
wrote:

> 2013-05-03 21:19, Xaxio Brandish wrote:
>
>> Ah.  The document scope [1] explains why it uses "HTML" in the title as
>> opposed to HTML5 or HTML(5).
>
> No, it only says *that* it uses "HTML" to refer to "the W3C HTML5  
> specification, W3C HTML5.1 specification, and the WHATWG HTML standard".  
> *Why* it does so is not addressed at all, though the reader might infer  
> that people just couldn't agree on a name, after WHATWG decided to  
> abandon the name "HTML5".

It's mostly for readability. Noted in the document.

> "HTML" has been used through the ages to denote a markup language (and  
> associated definitions) in a broad sense, as opposite to specific  
> versions. This is still the everyday meaning. And a title of a work  
> should be understandable without reading some explanation inside it,  
> saying that some common term has an uncommon meaning.
>
> If you can't agree on a proper name, at least call it something like  
> "modern HTML". Or, perhaps more realistically, "near-future HTML".

"Modern HTML differences from HTML4"? I'm not convinced that's a win.  
"Near-future" seems wrong since it's more like "current".

> It's not clear to me why the document is needed in the first place. It  
> would seem to be much more relevant to document in detail the  
> differences between HTML 5, HTML 5.1, and WHATWG Living HTML than to  
> write a rather general document about the differences between them (as  
> if they were a single and stabile specification) and HTML 4.

Such a document would be useful, but it's not this document. The primary  
focus for this document is what is different from HTML4.

-- 
Simon Pieters
Opera Software
Received on Monday, 6 May 2013 12:12:36 UTC

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