On Tue, 07 May 2013 16:37:21 +0200, Gordon P. Hemsley
gphems...@gmail.com wrote:
Simon,
I think it would be good to consider the target audiences, of which
there are probably many:
You have the audience who is worried that HTML5 is some grand
departure from the HTML 4.01 they (think they)
On Wed, 08 May 2013 03:36:51 +0200, Jens O. Meiert j...@meiert.com wrote:
I understand the amount of space it takes. I still don't understand
what the
problem is. Is it that people look at the scrollbar and think oh wow
this
document is too long, I'm not gonna bother reading it at all.? Or
On Tue, 07 May 2013 05:49:39 +0200, Jens O. Meiert j...@meiert.com wrote:
This document doesn't have versions (anymore). Is the length of that
section
a problem?
Yes. It’s probably a lesser important part of the document but it
appears to take up about half of the space (or blows the
On Mon, 06 May 2013 16:50:03 +0200, Jukka K. Korpela jkorp...@cs.tut.fi
wrote:
I don't think this is of particular importance.
If it isn't, why not use the correct spelling?
Mostly to be consistent with HTML5.
When referring to specifications, it is usually a good idea to use their
own
(13/05/07 17:00), Simon Pieters wrote:
Since WHATWG does not use a proper name for its version (the title is
just HTML), I think the only way to refer to it properly is to
prefix it with WHATWG. This would lead to the title
Differences of HTML5 and WHATWG HTML from HTML 4.01
Here HTML5 is
On Tue, 07 May 2013 11:52:46 +0200, Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu
kangh...@oupeng.com wrote:
Differences of HTML5 and WHATWG HTML from HTML 4.01
Here HTML5 is supposed to refer to W3C HTML5 and W3C HTML5.1?
Seems so. Is there a concern here?
Well, HTML5 could refer to just HTML5...
How about I
Simon,
I think it would be good to consider the target audiences, of which
there are probably many:
You have the audience who is worried that HTML5 is some grand
departure from the HTML 4.01 they (think they) know and love. For
them, you'll want to describe what exactly has been removed and why,
I understand the amount of space it takes. I still don't understand what the
problem is. Is it that people look at the scrollbar and think oh wow this
document is too long, I'm not gonna bother reading it at all.? Or something
else?
That is one scenario which could have an effect on how many
On Fri, 03 May 2013 18:20:51 +0200, Jukka K. Korpela jkorp...@cs.tut.fi
wrote:
2013-05-03 18:37, Simon Pieters wrote:
The past few days I've been working on updating the HTML differences
from HTML4 document, which is a deliverable of the W3C HTML WG but is
now also available as a version
On Sat, 04 May 2013 00:21:18 +0200, Jens O. Meiert j...@meiert.com wrote:
http://html-differences.whatwg.org/
Thanks Simon!
Unrelated to the rest of the conversation, could we reconsider whether
every version of this document needs to list *all* document-internal
changes, in section 6?
I’d
2013-05-06 15:12, Simon Pieters wrote:
I think you should start from making the title sensible. HTML
differences from HTML4 is too esoteric even in this context.
Do you have a suggestion?
I made some suggestions, which you comment later, but I will make
another one here.
Besides, the
Unrelated to the rest of the conversation, could we reconsider whether
every version of this document needs to list *all* document-internal
changes, in section 6?
This document doesn't have versions (anymore). Is the length of that section
a problem?
Yes. It’s probably a lesser important
Hi
The past few days I've been working on updating the HTML differences from
HTML4 document, which is a deliverable of the W3C HTML WG but is now also
available as a version with the WHATWG style sheet:
http://html-differences.whatwg.org/
Review welcome. Please file bugs.
--
Simon
2013-05-03 18:37, Simon Pieters wrote:
The past few days I've been working on updating the HTML differences
from HTML4 document, which is a deliverable of the W3C HTML WG but is
now also available as a version with the WHATWG style sheet:
http://html-differences.whatwg.org/
I think you
Good day,
Let us start with a definition:
es·o·ter·ic
/ˌesəˈterik/
Adjective
Intended for or likely to be understood by only a small number of people
with a specialized knowledge or interest.
The document Simon delivered and formatted is useful to a wide range of
audiences interested in HTML
The way I interpreted it, Jukka meant that the title could be
something more flowing, like Differences between HTML4 and HTML(5).
Gordon
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Xaxio Brandish xaxiobrand...@gmail.com wrote:
Good day,
Let us start with a definition:
es·o·ter·ic
/ˌesəˈterik/
Ah. The document scope [1] explains why it uses HTML in the title as
opposed to HTML5 or HTML(5).
--Xaxio
References:
[1] http://html-differences.whatwg.org/#scope
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 11:16 AM, Gordon P. Hemsley gphems...@gmail.comwrote:
The way I interpreted it, Jukka meant that the
It is my understanding that the W3C version lists HTML5 and the
WHATWG version uses HTML. That was what I intended by HTML(5). I
didn't mean the parentheses were included literally.
Gordon
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Xaxio Brandish xaxiobrand...@gmail.com wrote:
Ah. The document scope [1]
I see what you're saying.
The document title on the WHATWG site is titled based on the W3C document
[1]. However, I see no reason to keep the same title structure; it will be
easy to find either way.
In that case, Differences between HTML and HTML4 sounds nice as well.
The only reservation I
2013-05-03 21:19, Xaxio Brandish wrote:
Ah. The document scope [1] explains why it uses HTML in the title as
opposed to HTML5 or HTML(5).
No, it only says *that* it uses HTML to refer to the W3C HTML5
specification, W3C HTML5.1 specification, and the WHATWG HTML standard.
*Why* it does so
No, it only says *that* it uses HTML to refer to the W3C HTML5
specification, W3C HTML5.1 specification, and the WHATWG HTML standard.
*Why* it does so is not addressed at all
You are correct. The why is something that should be addressed. Perhaps
the document could read:
This document
Xaxio wrote:
If you believe that documenting the (constantly evolving) differences
between HTML and its HTML5 and HTML5.1 subsets would be relevant, please do
so! It would be a great thing to be able to reference such a document.
I have made a start on a document
http://html-differences.whatwg.org/
Thanks Simon!
Unrelated to the rest of the conversation, could we reconsider whether
every version of this document needs to list *all* document-internal
changes, in section 6?
I’d argue it suffices to list the changes to the last version of the
document.
23 matches
Mail list logo
