(FYI)
-------- Original Message --------
From: - Mon Oct 12 20:38:00 2009
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00800000
X-Mozilla-Keys:
Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 20:37:04 +0200
From: Julian Reschke <[log in to unmask]>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de; rv:1.8.0.4)
Gecko/20060516 Thunderbird/1.5.0.4 Mnenhy/0.7.4.666
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: HTMLWG WG <[log in to unmask]>
CC: Manu Sporny <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: ISSUE-55: Re-enable @profile in HTML5 (draft 1)
References: <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
boundary="------------000202010306050600050304"
Manu Sporny wrote:
> I volunteered for an action to produce a draft document that included
> @profile in HTML5:
>
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/144
>
> The document attempts to address the long standing ISSUE-55:
>
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/55
>
> After speaking with Julian over the weekend, we explored the possibility
> that perhaps the document should focus on the concept of extending
> processing behavior for user agents via @profile and @version. Perhaps
> even stating that we'd like to move away from @profile (because it
> hasn't been used as much as we'd like), toward something that is simpler
> and has been used in both XHTML and RDFa: a specifically formatted
> @version attribute.
> ...
It appears trying to do multiple things at once complicates things.
Thus, may I suggest to divide this into smaller chunks we can develop,
and hopefully find consensus on?
For @profile the things to do include:
1) Agreeing on what HTML 4.01 should have said (acknowledging it's
inconsistent, and thus contributes to the confusion)
2) Documenting @profile as conforming, either separately, or inside
HTML5 (where I would prefer the latter)
3) Optionally find a better replacement for @profile, which *could* be
[log in to unmask] Note that deploying that will require updates to
those specs that currently use @profile, such GRDDL or DC-HTML, so it
will require a transition period in which @profile would stay conforming.
Attached is a proposal for 1). I realize that we're not doing errata for
HTML 4.01, but IMHO having this phrased this way will be helpful for
steps 2) and 3).
Best regards, Julian
PS: thanks to Björn for proofreading
|