Re: Backward-compatibility of text/html media type (ACTION-334, ACTION-364)

On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 17:26:34 +0100, Julian Reschke <>  
> Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 16:58:03 +0100, <> wrote:
>>> That's the choice, I think.  I prefer #1.
>>  The reason I prefer #2 is that we have had reason to obsolete features  
>> over time. Given that it makes sense that conformance also evolves over  
>> time as we learn more about the medium.
> But we're not obsoleting, we're removing.

Removing is what I understand obsoleting to be. (Though I believe all old  
features are still mentioned.)

> If HTML5 only removed things that were already deprecated in HTML4 we'd  
> probably have a different discussion.

If we developed HTML5 at the pace of HTML32, HTML4, etc. that might be  
reasonable, but I don't think that is necessary now.

Anne van Kesteren

Received on Wednesday, 3 February 2010 13:51:26 UTC