On May 11, 2007, at 3:15 PM, John Allsopp wrote:
Hi all,
I'm not sure how many here (a few at least?) have been following
developments with the W3's HTML WG.
In essence, the future of HTML will be HTML5:
"We are resolved, then, that the W3C's next-generation HTML
specification be named "HTML 5" and to start review of the text of
the HTML 5 and WF2 specifications, and we welcome Ian Hickson and
Dave Hyatt as editors (while remaining open to the possibility of
other editors in the future)." [1]
Of particular relevance to this mailing list is the way in which
HTML5 provides mechanisms for extending the semantics of HTML - and
the discussions around the issue of semantics in HTML generally.
This thread on the very busy mailing list (which is in effect is
now the official communications channel for the development of
HTML) should give a sense of the general way in which people
involved are thinking. [2]
I'd argue that things don't look overly promising on that front at
present. Two mechanisms are currently used in HTML5
1. A small number of new HTML elements, like <copyright>
HTML5 does have new elements, some of which are mainly for semantic
purposes, but it does not at present have a <copyright> element. Some
of the new elements include <header>, <footer>, <section>, <article>
and <aside>. HTML5 also applies semantics to some formerly
presentation elements based on their most common use, for instance
<small> is defined to be appropriate for details that would normally
be in fine print.
2. "reserved" class values that coincide with currently widely used
class values in the wild (though whether any two instances of the
same class value will always imply the same thing is open to
consideration, at the very least).
The current proposal does have a predefined "copyright" class though.
Unfortunately the HTML WG mailing list is ludicrously busy - 1000+
messages a week, so keeping up with it, and participating is,
frankly, impossible, but I do think it is an area in which
participants in this community have a significant amount of
theoretical and practical experience with, and the HTML 5 efforts
would definitely benefit from that. In the associated threads I've
seen very little mention of ufs, and where they have been
mentioned, somewhat critical (abbr pattern problems, even with ufs
no one uses profiles so HTML 5 should get rid of them ...)
From the outside, the whole enterprise does look like possibly
falling into a heap of political/religious/theoretical debates, and
does make me feel that at time arguably restrictive policies of
what's on topic for these mailing lists in fact serve the community
very well in many ways.
Anyway, just a little update on something that is without doubt
very relevant to the efforts of the uf community, and hopefully
many of the lessons hard learned over the last few years developing
ufs might benefit the HTML WG efforts
The HTML Working Group (and the WHATWG, which is continuing to
operate in parallel) would welcome participation from microformats
experts and advocates.
Regards,
Maciej
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
