- From: Jim Jewett <jimjjewett@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 12:26:16 -0400
- To: "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com>
- Cc: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>, "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, www-html@w3.org, public-html@w3.org
On 5/3/07, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com> wrote: > <center> is also unlikely to be allowed. Yet it needs to be part of the > parsing algorithm and part of the rendering requirements for visual > desktop browsers to ensure interoperability. ... Agreed. > So I'd like to know if your argument is about some of the current elements > allowed by the specification such as <b> or if it is about user agents > requirements in the parsing section, rendering section, et cetera. There > is a line between those two which I think is useful to clearly mark. My objection is about the parsing/rendering/etc section. I view these "here is how to handle tag soup the normal way" requirements roughly the same way I view HTTP requirements. They are certainly *related* to HTML, but they are separable, and should be separated. (Based on http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/ as of May 3, 2007), as a first pass, I would separate out the following: Section 4 (Web Browsers), except for subsection 4.4 (Links) Section 6 (Communication) Section 8.2 (Parsing) You need this information to write an interactive application that works in the wild, or to write a new fully-functional browser. You don't need it to read/write/validate a document. In fact, you're probably better off if the people writing the content *don't* think about these sections in detail, and just leave these concerns isolated to a few common scripts. Whether to call this new document "Web Compatibility", or to let it keep "Web Applications" instead of "Web Documents" -- I'm not sure. Whether to further simplify (move some elements to the Compatiiblity document? rephrase the parsing to distinguish between normal path and expected recovery from common errors?) ... is a decision to make after deciding whether to split at all. -jJ
Received on Thursday, 3 May 2007 16:26:26 UTC