- From: William F Hammond <hammond@csc.albany.edu>
- Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2016 12:29:18 -0400
- To: Frédéric WANG <fred.wang@free.fr>
- Cc: <www-math@w3.org>
Frédéric WANG <fred.wang@free.fr> writes:
> Le 03/08/2016 à 10:50, David Carlisle a écrit :
>> Not sure I agree with the claim that this is bad as a general rule.
>> Certainly in html there are many things deprecated and classed as
>> invalid in html(5) where the html5 renderer is still specified to
>> support the old behaviour <a name="xx" etc.
>
> True, however HTML5 old features were still kept to preserve
> compatibility with existing browser implementations and documents
> available on the web. Most of the attributes listed here were never
> implemented in browsers and/or have very low (inexistent?) usage.
I suppose pulling support for 'never implemented' is OK.
Low usage is quite different. If any document on the web
uses it and support is pulled, then that document is broken.
Hasn't Tim Berners-Lee said that one should not do this (assuming
the document was correct when posted)?
Also: how does one determine low usage? There can be large archives
unknown to a given user and not found in search engines.
-- Bill
Received on Thursday, 4 August 2016 16:29:45 UTC