Eric! wrote:I think you misunderstood me. By cutting loose any ties to versions and never setting specific goals and never having a finished document, the HTML spec has no real power anymore.
I understood you. The point you miss is that all the previous HTML specs "had no power." Apple, Google, Mozilla and Opera just acknowledged that fact and put in place a system that will be more effective given the reality of situation.
Eric! wrote:This living spec concept greatly benefits manufacturers because they can do what they want, pour money into ideas they like, ignore things they don't and not even bother testing it very well. However this model doesn't serve the customers or web designers very well. Anyone wanting their site to be multi-browser compatible is going to have to be the person to fix it, yet again. Most companies in it for the long haul see a need to play nice and agree on common standards. This won't happen if there is a constantly changing set of requirements with no end. HTML version formally known as 5 was a chance to clamp down on all these new ideas, rope all the browser builders together and get them on the same page and get everyone compliant.
Not sure who the "manufacturers" are here? Seriously doubt the browser builders won't bother "testing if very well." I find HTML5 much more "multi-browser compatible" but we still need older browsers to fade away. Not clear what "constantly changing set of requirements" means ... requirements? HTML5 accepts the reality that there will be a continuous stream of new features. At least you are honest that you want to "clamp down on all these new ideas" ... yeah ... hate those new ideas.
Eric! wrote:If this path leads to "everything being fine" I'd be delightfully shocked. I've seen this simple, "organic" spec. approach tried before, it isn't new. It is really an old concept often used by small startup companies. It works ok when there are only one or two players, but we're taking 10 or so with world wide compatibility issues -- not so good.
I predict that most people will be "delightfully shocked" ... but you still won't be happy.
Eric! wrote:But If I can write one complex HTML(5?) document with all the new features and multiple layers (javascript, css, etc) and every browser does the same thing then I'll have no complaints. The problem is they've been working on this since 2008 (2004 if you count SGML) and other people (as mentioned in this thread) besides me are still disinterested in pushing the "HTML version formally known as 5" on their clients.
That's the dream and the problem. Not clear why you would push a HTML version on you clients?