[whatwg] Syntax Highlighting [was: several messages]
ian at hixie.ch
Mon Dec 13 10:47:17 PST 2004
>>> [ added <textarea accept="text/x-whatever"> ]
>> [ useless! take it out! ]
> [ could be useful! leave it in! ]
I have no strong opinion either way on this.
I can see the argument for, namely that it gives metadata much like <meta
name="author" content="Foo Bar"> gives metadata, and that there is no
requirement for the UA to do anything with it since it is merely a hint.
The way it is defined now, it just says what _kind_ of text is expected in
the textarea, so that in future UAs can do something with it if they want.
It's also very cheap as far as the spec goes, taking just one paragraph.
I can also see the arguments against (indeed I originally argued it
shouldn't be added because of these), namely that it won't be implemented,
can't be tested, and should therefore be cut.
The way it is defined now, it is just as useless as <meta>: UAs will never
do anything with it.
It's also just confusing to have this in the spec without clear use cases.
Please argue this amongst each other and come to an agreement as to
whether the feature should be kept or not. Before publishing the next
version of the spec, if there isn't a clear agreement, I'll look at the
arguments and if there is no clear strong argument on either side, will
probably just flip a coin and either remove the feature or leave it as
the coin decides.
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg