- From: Jim Jewett <jimjjewett@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 12:45:24 -0400
- To: "Philip & Le Khanh" <Philip-and-LeKhanh@royal-tunbridge-wells.org>
- Cc: "Henri Sivonen" <hsivonen@iki.fi>, tina@greytower.net, "David Woolley" <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>, www-html@w3.org
On 4/29/07, Philip & Le Khanh <Philip-and-LeKhanh@royal-tunbridge-wells.org> wrote: > Henri Sivonen wrote: > > HTML has a remarkable large author base that extends beyond markup > purists. > True, for HTML $n, n <= 4.01$; false (and meaningless) for HTML $m, m > > 4.01$. > Since we are discussing HTML $m, m >= 4.01$, we need not be concerned about > current practice; all that matters is what the practice /should/ be, > informed > by the best available received wisdom. Yes and No. XHTML2 worked for purity. When do you expect it will be widely adopted? If version 5.0 requires too many changes from existing practice all at once, then either it will never be adopted, or (more likely), people will claim to write HTML 5, but continue writing tag soup, and browsers will continue to accomodate them, because readers don't care about purity. If version 5.0 cleans up the worst of the mess, in places that are already incompatible, and the browsers agree (as a cartel) not to support those types of brokenness, then at least the problem stops getting worse. -jJ
Received on Tuesday, 1 May 2007 16:45:28 UTC