- From: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:15:08 -0400
- To: Aryeh Gregor <ayg@aryeh.name>
- CC: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>, Karl Dubost <karl+w3c@la-grange.net>, spec-prod@w3.org
Hey, folks- On 8/18/11 3:59 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote: > Today I was talking with a few people about the fact that W3C > specifications cannot be published as HTML5. As far as I can tell, > the pubrules say: > > "All normative representations must validate as one of the following: > HTML 4.x, some version of XHTML that is a W3C Recommendation, or RDFa > in XHTML. Team Contacts please see the Communications Team to propose > additional exceptions." ... > So it's a bit of a puzzle to me why specs can't just be published as > HTML5. What are the practical problems it might cause that outweigh > the benefits? Multiple people have told me that polyglot HTML5 might > be okay, but why is non-polyglot HTML5 any worse than HTML4.01 (which > is allowed)? What would the procedure be for trying to get this > requirement changed? > > Thanks to everyone for their time. Speaking for myself, I would support using HTML5 in TR, whether polyglot or not. For those that use an XML toolchain, couldn't they simply convert HTML5-based specs to their format of choice? Regards- -Doug
Received on Thursday, 18 August 2011 20:15:19 UTC