Re: HTML5 script start tag should select appropriate content model according to src

Henri Sivonen wrote:

> HTML5 does not have that base yet, but to be successful a new version of 
> a given technology (in general) has to plug into and leverage the 
> network (in the network effect sense) grown around the old version. That 
> is, HTML5 should be defined in a way that allows the HTML 4.01 author 
> base easily become the HTML5 author base. Personally, I think it would 
> be a serious design flaw is HTML5 couldn't satisfy the authoring use 
> cases of authors who use HTML 4.01 today.

It can satisfy them, but in ways that are better at separating content 
from presentation.

> What would be the point of 
> knowingly designing a new version of HTML for non-adoption by the 
> existing author base?

Progress? And again, most of the current author base uses authoring 
tools. If the authoring tools adopt the new standard and present it to 
users in a sensible way, you haven't lost that author base.

Again, if an author is happy with what she's doing in HTML 4.01, using 
font, bold, italic, all sorts of presentational stuff, there's no real 
need for her to "switch" to html5. Unless you're measuring the success 
of the technology by how many people convert to the new standard 
seamlessly. If that's the measure, then yes I can see why you wouldn't 
want to make any fundamental changes, maintaining the status quo.

P
-- 
Patrick H. Lauke
______________________________________________________________
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
http://redux.deviantart.com
______________________________________________________________
Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force
http://webstandards.org/
______________________________________________________________
Take it to the streets ... join the WaSP Street Team
http://streetteam.webstandards.org/
______________________________________________________________

Received on Sunday, 29 April 2007 21:05:29 UTC