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

Re: Complex Table Examples

From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 05:02:41 +1000
Message-ID: <464760D1.80700@lachy.id.au>
To: www-html@w3.org

L. David Baron wrote:
> On Sunday 2007-05-13 14:24 +1000, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
>> No, that's backwards.  Nothing gets added or retained without some 
>> evidence that it's needed.  Otherwise, you could use that argument to 
>> get us show why the <foo> element isn't needed, instead having the ones 
>> who asked for it explain why it is.  Saying it should be included in 
>> HTML5 just because it was in HTML4 isn't good enough.
> I disagree.
> If something is implemented and used on the Web, it should stay in 
> the HTML spec.  Mark as deprecated if you want, but don't pretend 
> that mistakes of the past will disappear if you remove them from the 
> spec.
> Implementations are still going to need to implement these features.

This discussion has nothing to do with what will be specified for 
implementations to support, this is just about what is considered 
conforming for documents.

But, what I said still applies implementation requirements in general as 
well.  For instance, support for IE's <t:video> or WebTV's <audioscope> 
elements probably won't be required because there's very little evidence 
(if any) to show that they're needed.

Lachlan Hunt
Received on Sunday, 13 May 2007 19:02:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 30 April 2020 16:21:03 UTC