This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 21995 - Spelling and grammatical errors, as well as other suggestions.
Summary: Spelling and grammatical errors, as well as other suggestions.
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: HTML WG
Classification: Unclassified
Component: HTML5 differences from HTML4 (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC Linux
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Simon Pieters
QA Contact: HTML WG Bugzilla archive list
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2013-05-10 09:30 UTC by xaxiobrandish
Modified: 2013-05-13 12:52 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:


Attachments
Documented changes to the "Differences from HTML4" document. (125.37 KB, application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.text)
2013-05-10 09:30 UTC, xaxiobrandish
Details

Description xaxiobrandish 2013-05-10 09:30:59 UTC
Created attachment 1360 [details]
Documented changes to the "Differences from HTML4" document.

I'm not sure of an easier way to specify so many changes to the document, so I've included a LibreOffice document that uses the "Edit -> Changes -> Record" feature to highlight all of the changes, and the "Insert -> Comment" feature to add questions or rationale.

Please feel free to accept any or all of these changes, and let me know if I should deliver this in a different way.
Comment 1 Simon Pieters 2013-05-13 12:52:11 UTC
https://github.com/whatwg/html-differences/commit/5db6909016c735350eb423efad7cb7226d55ab96

> In order to simplify the readability of this document,

The current document has "For readability,", which seems to say the same thing with fewer words, so I've kept that.

> "critical mass" isn't something that can be well-defined

The same can be said for "growing amount". I dropped it instead.

> "The doctype has no other purpose."
> Debatable? “infer an author's intent when the document lives in a tree of documents targeting various specifications.”
>
> http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/help-whatwg.org/2008-February/000123.html

The doctype does not serve that purpose.

> To be defined as a document, the html root element must be included.

The tags are optional.

> must

I try to avoid RFC2119 keywords to avoid confusion since this document is not normative.

> May want to include a reference to where this is specified.

The document doesn't include references in general. Why here?

> Not sure “embed” is new (it was simply deprecated), so perhaps the section title could contain “new and revised” instead of just “new”.

No, HTML4 doesn't even mention embed.

> Is “setter creator” correct?  I can't seem to find these terms used together anywhere else.

Yes, it's correct. See the IDL for HTMLOptionsCollection.

Thanks for the review! Please reopen or file new bugs if you disagree with my changes or if I missed something.