- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 01:16:39 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
On Tue, 10 Mar 2009, Doug Schepers wrote: > > > > It seems dangerous to split the definition of how to parse text/html > > into multiple specifications. However, updating the list should be > > easy and quick, and in practice shouldn't affect implementations (who > > would just update their lists regardless of what the specs say). What > > is the concern? > > It seems riskier to bottleneck element parsing to one time-frozen > specification. I agree that implementations will update their internal > list of supported non-HTML elements and attributes regardless of what > HTML5 says, so it doesn't seem practical to include any such list in the > HTML5 spec. > > Let's say that 2 months after HTML5 becomes a Rec, SVG comes out with the > <pony> element, which has a the @hands attribute. I assume you mean more something like fePony with a jazzHands attribute, since all-lowercase names would work fine. > Obviously, all browser vendors would implement this element and its > attribute, post-haste. Now, either HTML5 is out of date, or it needs to > have an errata issued and ultimately a second edition. By the time HTML5 becomes a REC, it will have been out of date for a long time. I would fully expect work on HTML6 to be in full swing by then, and HTML6 would be able to track the new features easily. Adding a new attribute or element name requires a careful study of existing content, which is far more work than any sort of editing of a spec. I think worrying about which spec the list is in is optimising the easy part while ignoring the real bottlenecks. Note that nothing stops a future version of SVG adding names and attributes to the list anyway, acting as a kind of errata to HTML itself, should it be found that the HTML working group at the time is no longer responsive to feedback of this nature. > In the worst-case scenario, some implementers (or authors) might feel > gated by the whitelist of elements in HTML5, and might not implement (or > use) <pony hands="13.7"/>. That would be a real shame. The odds of an implementor feeling like they shouldn't do something because the spec doesn't justify it are spectacularily remote. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 11 March 2009 01:17:15 UTC