This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
The text of the current HTML 5 draft does not contain the sections in previous versions of HTML in regards to Deprecated and Obsolete HTML elements[1]. Instead, the current document references terms such as "obsolete but conforming" [2], leaving a great deal of confusion about just what this means, and about the state of the elements so described. [3][4]. In addition, several valid HTML 4 elements and attributes have been described as obsolete in HTML 5, not deprecated, which does not provide a graceful transition period for people to remove these elements/attributes from their web documents. Considering how widespread the support for deprecated is within the technology industry[5], the HTML 5 specification should return to the previously defined sections describing deprecated and obsolete as listed in the HTML 4 document. Doing so will ensure that older HTML elements aren't abruptly dropped, causing confusion. This move will also ensure that there is a procedure in place to ensure that when an element is dropped, it's dropped in favor of a replacement that provides the same, or enhanced functionality. It will also help clarify confusion caused by using terminology not used previously with any other known specification. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/conform.html#deprecated [2] http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#obsolete [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Aug/0121.html [4] http://realtech.burningbird.net/deprecated-is-now-obsolete [5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deprecation (this was original created directly as an Issue, Issue 72)
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: no spec change Rationale: > The text of the current HTML 5 draft does not contain the sections in previous > versions of HTML in regards to Deprecated and Obsolete HTML elements[1]. Previous versions plural? I couldn't find that section in HTML 3.2, HTML2, XHTML 1.1, or any other HTML spec that I looked at other than HTML4. > Instead, the current document references terms such as "obsolete but > conforming" [2], leaving a great deal of confusion about just what this means, > and about the state of the elements so described. [3][4]. There's really not that much to be confused about. These features are obsolete. They are only conforming because they are essentially harmless when used in existing documents, and so it's not worth the effort to clean out older documents that use them, but they are still obsolete because they don't do anything useful, and so it would waste authors' time if they used them. > In addition, several valid HTML 4 elements and attributes have been described > as obsolete in HTML 5, not deprecated, which does not provide a graceful > transition period for people to remove these elements/attributes from their web > documents. Experience with HTML4 has shown that the concern over transition periods is misplaced. People don't transition when you tell them they can still use the feature. Consider the transition period to be the development cycle of HTML5. By the time HTML5 is done, we'll have had as long as the time from HTML4 to now, so that's plenty of time for people to transition. > Considering how widespread the support for deprecated is within the technology > industry[5], the HTML 5 specification should return to the previously defined > sections describing deprecated and obsolete as listed in the HTML 4 document. This isn't a popularity game. We're not doing things because they're widely supported, we're doing them because they're the right solution. Deprecation on the Web has been shown to be the wrong solution. > Doing so will ensure that older HTML elements aren't abruptly dropped, causing > confusion. Clearly deprecation doesn't help with this either, since when we removed style="", which was deprecated in XHTML 1.1, people got very confused. > This move will also ensure that there is a procedure in place to > ensure that when an element is dropped, it's dropped in favor of a replacement > that provides the same, or enhanced functionality. Deprecation does not provide this. We already have this using a far superior mechanism: wide public peer review. > It will also help clarify > confusion caused by using terminology not used previously with any other known > specification. The terms "obsolete" and "conforming" are widely used.
Opened as issue 106 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/106
I created bug 10087 because I do not know if I should repopen this one.
*** Bug 10087 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
That issue is not resolved. I therefore reopened it.
(In reply to comment #5) > That issue is not resolved. I therefore reopened it. For what it's worth, I agree with your concerns. I have also written on this issue: http://realtech.burningbird.net/deprecated-is-now-obsolete I hope you pursue this issue through the decision process. Good luck.
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: no spec change Rationale: invalid use of bug tracker (this was already escalated) - please see decision policy document cited above for details
(In reply to comment #7) > EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are > satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If > you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please > reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML > Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest > title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue > yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: > http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html > > Status: Rejected > Change Description: no spec change > Rationale: invalid use of bug tracker (this was already escalated) - please see > decision policy document cited above for details I am attempting to re-open Issue 106.
Do not reopen bugs that are to become issues. That is an invalid use of the bug system. Please see the document you quoted the citation of in your last comment for details.