RE: ISSUE-54 (html5-doctype-vs-xslt): XSLT 1.0 can not generate HTML5 documents [HTML 5 spec]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-html-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Jonas Sicking
> Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 4:06 AM
> To: Justin James
> Cc: 'Simon Pieters'; 'Boris Zbarsky'; 'Karl Dubost'; 'HTML WG'
> Subject: Re: ISSUE-54 (html5-doctype-vs-xslt): XSLT 1.0 can not
> generate HTML5 documents [HTML 5 spec]
> 
> 
> Justin James wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: public-html-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-request@w3.org]
> On
> >> Behalf Of Simon Pieters
> >> Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 4:23 AM
> >> To: Boris Zbarsky; Karl Dubost
> >> Cc: HTML WG
> >> Subject: Re: ISSUE-54 (html5-doctype-vs-xslt): XSLT 1.0 can not
> >> generate HTML5 documents [HTML 5 spec]
> >>
> >>> 2) <font size="n"> gives different results in quirks mode.
> >> This not.
> >
> > I am curious how much thought we want to give to an element that was
> deprecated in HTML 4. Authors have had nearly 10 years to stop using
> it. I think that is plenty of fair warning that it can/might/will
> become "broken". :)
> 
> It's not really a matter of how long something has been deprecated, but
> rather on how many pages out there does this something.
> 
> Would you use a browser where 30% of your favorite sites looked
> horrible
> or were simply unusable? Would your opinion change if the reason they
> broke was because the site relied on features deprecated in HTML4? Do
> you think average users would?

I agree, but at the same time, "deprecated" has got to mean something, too.

Besides, why should we be concerned with what browsers do in "quirks mode"? Defining how a browser works in "quirks mode" is not our domain; that browser's developers are in charge of that.

J.Ja

Received on Friday, 5 September 2008 18:05:33 UTC