davep <[email protected]> writes: > I'm interested in your (and anyone elses) thoughts on HTML5 Norm?
It's not what I would have done, but no one asked me. As a refinement of HTML for use in browsers as a skeleton to hang JavaScript actions on, it's a very good fit. As a vocabulary to tag documents, it's better than HTML4 if a bit...quirky. > What functionality is lost please? The HTML5 image/video elements, AFAICT, have no facilities for setting the size or scaling, for example. In HTML+CSS you'd do that by wrapping eleven divs with random class names [stop being fascetious -ed] around the video and using CSS to style them. We have "width" and "depth" (yes, I wish we'd named that "height"), "contentwidth" and "contentdepth", "align", "valign", "scale", and "scalefit" as attributes on the data element and carefully considered rules for how they interact, see: http://docbook.org/tdg51/en/html/imagedata.html If we adopted something isomorphic to HTML5, we'd lose the size and scaling controls. Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh <[email protected]> | Internet connection, $19.95 a http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | month. Computer, $799.95. Modem, Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | $149.95. Telephone line, $24.95 a | month. Software, free. USENET | transmission, hundreds if not | thousands of dollars. Thinking | before posting, priceless. | Somethings in life you can't buy. | For everything else, there's | MasterCard.--Graham Reed, in the | Scary Devil Monastery
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
