- From: WBS Mailer on behalf of LMM@acm.org <webmaster@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 13 May 2010 20:40:01 +0000
- To: LMM@acm.org,www-archive@w3.org
The following answers have been successfully submitted to 'ISSUE-90: Removing the figure Element - Straw Poll for Objections' (HTML Working Group) for Larry Masinter. --------------------------------- Objections to the Change Proposal to Remove the figure Element ---- We have a Change Proposal to remove the figure element. If you have strong objections to adopting this Change Proposal, please state your objections below. Keep in mind, you must actually state an objection, not merely cite someone else. If you feel that your objection has already been adequately addressed by someone else, then it is not necessary to repeat it. Objections: --------------------------------- Objections to the Change Proposal to Keep New Elements and Attributes ---- We have a Change Proposal to keep several newly-introduced semantic elements, attributes, and controls. If you have strong objections to adopting this Change Proposal specifically with respect to the figure element, please state your objections below. Keep in mind, you must actually state an objection, not merely cite someone else. If you feel that your objection has already been adequately addressed by someone else, then it is not necessary to repeat it. Objections: I'm not *strongly* opposed to the concepts that these semantic elements, attributes and controls add, but I do think that, in order to actually reach a W3C standard quickly, controversial additions that are likely to slow down progress or result in poor interoperability should be removed from the specification so that the W3C HTML working group can reach closure quickly. One thing that concerns me about many of these is that the transition plan is unclear to me: how can authors can introduce these new features and still be compatible with older browsers? Without a clear, acceptable transition plan, the risk is to fragment the web, and to encourage authors to create "best viewed by HTML5" web sites, in a repeat of Browser Wars 1.0. The current specification does not address the transition and fallback issues, and for that reason alone, these elements should be removed until those details can be worked out and reviewed fully. These answers were last modified on 13 May 2010 at 20:37:56 U.T.C. by Larry Masinter Answers to this questionnaire can be set and changed at http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/issue-90-objection-poll/ until 2010-05-19. Regards, The Automatic WBS Mailer
Received on Thursday, 13 May 2010 20:40:05 UTC