- From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Date: Mon, 07 May 2007 00:19:58 +1000
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- CC: www-html@w3.org
Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: > * Lachlan Hunt wrote: >> Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: >>> If we follow the draft we actually find that the burden of explaining >>> what real practical problems can occur is on the proponents of the idea, >> The burden of proof is on the ones making the claim. The claim is that >> predefined classes create real, practical problems. Prove it! >> >> Some of the classes were chosen because they are widely used. We have >> statistics to show that, for example, copyright is the 9th most widely >> used value. What is the problem with using assigning a definition that >> is compatible with the dictionary definition of the term? >> >> http://code.google.com/webstats/2005-12/classes.html > > I do have a problem with you claiming that a plausible example is > implausible and ignoring requests to back that up, especially if you > demand demonstration of evidence and proof of others. I did not claim it was implausible. I claimed it was hypothetical because it was presented without any evidence to back it up. There have since been some examples presented, which is good, but still no explanation of what problems are caused. But, here's some evidence to support the definition of class="copyright" in the spec. The following sites all use the value in a relatively compatible way. Although some use it on elements other than those allowed by the spec, it's the value that's important. However, I agree that's a bug in the spec. http://slashdot.org/ http://www.news.com.au/ http://www.msn.com/ http://www.mozilla.org/ These used id="copyright", but it's the value that's important, not the specific attribute. http://ten.com.au/ http://au.yahoo.com/ http://www.yahoo.com/ http://www.theregister.co.uk/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page These used similar values. While they're not exactly the same, they're close enough to be considered in support of "copyright". http://ninemsn.com.au/ (used class="copyrightline" which is similar) http://youtube.com/ (used id=="footCopyright") > If you have any statistics that indeed show one thing or other, it'd be > great if you could share them with us. The document above does not con- > tain useful statistics as the reader is not given any means by which to > determine whether the used sample is representative for any particular > question of interest. In this sample it might come out as #9, using some > other sample it might be #3 or #99, the numbers just aren't useful. It is clearly stated in the introduction that the study used "a sample of slightly over a billion documents". Hixie has also done subsequent, though unpublished, studies with much greater sample sizes. http://code.google.com/webstats/ -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.au/
Received on Sunday, 6 May 2007 14:20:15 UTC