Here, the message is:
"Yes be absolutely conformant"
ourselves <--- who?
Le 5 déc. 2006 à 16:02, Ian Hickson a écrit :
So if they are just ignored, I guess that leaves full room for
people to
extend the document with other attributes.
Um, no, that would be non-conformant, and would make it extremely
hard to
extend the language ourselves in the future.
Here the message is "yes, force the innovation, once the critical
mass has been reached, we will have to adapt".
Le 12 déc. 2006 à 13:40, Ian Hickson a écrit :
So is the better approach to wait until the issue has created real
non-reversable problems and the web is even more Balkanized?
Yes. That's how technologies evolve and are designed. You let the
market
show you what is needed, then you address it. Addressing problems
before
they exist is a form of premature optimisation and is not a good
way to
design technologies.
Morality: if you are a community with needs, microformats, sw, etc.
do whatever you want, it doesn't matter that much :) The Web is
already 97% invalid. It will be more tag soup BUT at least once you
have reached a critical mass, people will formalized in a specs your
practices which were once done.
question: why do we create specs?
--
Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead
QA Weblog - http://www.w3.org/QA/
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
