- From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 22:49:20 +1000
- To: "Philip Taylor (Webmaster)" <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
- CC: www-html@w3.org
Philip Taylor (Webmaster) wrote: > Lachlan Hunt wrote: >> Do you realise how much time we would waste by starting with HTML4 >> and removing/replacing with features from HTML5, just to end up >> with a spec equivalent to the HTML5 spec we have now? A much >> better approach would be to start with the much more mature HTML5 >> spec and raise issues against the specific sections you have >> problems with. > > This is a joke, right ? No, I'm absolutely serious. > How can you possibly claim that the HTML5 specification is "much more > mature" than HTML 4.01, when the latter has existed since 24 December > 1999 whilst the former is still no nore than a "work in progress > [that] is changing on a daily if not hourly basis" ? HTML4 was abandoned long before it was interoperably implemented and it never will be (at least not in any UAs designed to handle the web). Although it is officially a Recommendation, you have understand that what was called a Rec back then, is roughly equivalent to what would be called a Candidate Recommendation these days. Yet, had it been developed with the same design principles as HTML5 is, I doubt it would have even made it to CR. These are a few of the ways in which HTML5 is more mature than HTML4: * It already includes most widely used features from HTML4. * It defines semantics much more clearly than HTML4 did. * It defines processing models that are compatible with the real world, HTML4 does not. * It defines several widely used features that are widely supported, yet previously undocumented. -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.au/
Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2007 12:49:35 UTC