W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > May 2007

Re: Cleaning House

From: Gareth Hay <gazhay@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 08:41:09 +0100
Message-Id: <FD942F3E-CAF2-4FCC-A617-B74B2AF6CB1D@gmail.com>
Cc: Lee Roberts <lee_roberts@roserockdesign.com>, www-html@w3.org, public-html@w3.org
To: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>

On 3 May 2007, at 05:55, David Hyatt wrote:

> Ok, let's say we do this.  Now an author decides it's time to  
> upgrade their site to HTML5.  They begin (naturally) by adding the  
> doctype to the top of their HTML file.  The entire site turns into  
> a complete disaster area because half of the tags they used have  
> been eliminated and the browser is being draconian about ignoring  
> those tags.  Author rolls eyes, yanks the doctype, and forgets  
> about HTML5.

That's a bit simplistic in it's nature.
A lazy oaf would do what you suggest, and I also think that if a  
company boss says "it needs to be html5" they would have no choice  
but to fix it.

Let me put it this way, how many developers in general get something  
to work by trial and error and once it works say it's done?
Quite a few, and that's what 90% of web authors do. If it works, they  
are happy, and so are their clients.
So look at what we have, a mess, more rigid application of rules will  
stop this.

I personally think new features should only be available to those  
documents declaring html5, so an author will be oblidged to fix  
things to make advances. Otherwise they continue with their lazy poor  
coding of webpages and make do with html4 features.

I actually think this is a great way to allow features to be  
deprecated, and also educate authors to produce more correct pages.

Received on Thursday, 3 May 2007 07:41:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 30 April 2020 16:21:02 UTC