Re: A Concrete Example for the HTML Versioning Debate

On Wed, 18 Apr 2007, Henrik Dvergsdal wrote:
> On 18. apr. 2007, at 07.15, Ian Hickson wrote:
> 
> > > And even if you can be reasonably confident - what is the harm in 
> > > introducing a "5" into the DOCTYPE somewhere?
> > 
> > It encourages people to think of HTML as a versioned specification, 
> > and encourages and gives the appearance of condoning exactly what 
> > Microsoft is intending to do.
> > 
> > It increases the size of the boilerplate, when we should be limiting 
> > it to the bare minimum.
> 
> Do you think that a versioning scheme is compatible with the current 
> HTML5 proposal?

I don't understand the question. What exactly do you mean by "versioning 
scheme" (there have been dozens of different proposals so far) and what 
exactly do you mean by "compatible"?

(Sent off-list to alleviate the load, but I'll reply on public-html if you 
can clarify the above and if I haven't already answered the question.)

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Wednesday, 18 April 2007 09:32:41 UTC