[whatwg] HTML5: compatible with all legacy Web browsers
Ian Hickson
ian at hixie.ch
Thu Aug 13 20:16:07 PDT 2009
On Thu, 6 Aug 2009, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
>
> Section 1.7:
>
> "The first such concrete syntax is "HTML5". This is the format
> recommended for most authors. It is compatible with all legacy Web
> browsers."
>
> I challenge the claim that HTML5 is compatible with *all* legacy Web
> browsers. I can produce valid HTML 4 documents today that are not
> compatible with *all* legacy Web browsers. I suggest this be weakened to
> something like "is compatible with most Web browsers still in active use
> today".
Changed "all" to "most".
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, Simon Pieters wrote:
>
> I guess the following is an example of a valid HTML5 document that is
> incompatible with legacy Web browsers:
>
> <!doctype html>
> <title></title>
> <svg><script/></svg>
> <p>Hello world</p>
It's certainly possible to use the language in a way that is incompatible
with legacy UAs.
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
>
> I think the meaning of "compatible with all existing browsers" here is
> that HTML 5 does not *require* authors to break compatibility with any
> existing browser.
Exactly.
> Clearer wording might be like, "HTML5 pages can be written to be
> compatible with all legacy Web browsers." Of course, "all legacy Web
> browsers" does need to be construed to exclude Netscape Navigator 3 and
> such. If you really want to be picky, it could be "all legacy Web
> browsers that still see significant use."
I think just saying the language is compatible is probably clear enough.
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, Erik Vorhes wrote:
>
> I agree completely with your interpretation of the phrase. HTML5 is
> intended to enhance the web without breaking it, so noting (or even
> emphasizing) how it's backwards-compatible is important and useful.
>
> But the phrase should be clarified along similar lines to what you've
> articulated. Maybe: "HTML5 can be written in such a way that it is
> compatible with all browsers made after X date"?
I don't think most people reading this are really going to be confused
either way on this.
--
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg
mailing list