There is a difference in people not caring about forward compatibility and polluting the global namespace, and not providing a mechanism to do it right in the first place.
If we're encouraging authors to define their own attributes, then we should provide a mechanism or a guideline to do so in a forward compatible manner. - R. Niwa > On May 7, 2014, at 1:23 PM, Ian Hickson <i...@hixie.ch> wrote: > >> On Wed, 7 May 2014, Ryosuke Niwa wrote: >> >> How are you going to quantify the risk of adding a new global attribute >> in the future? > > Same we we do today. Look to see how many pages use the attribute, find a > name that's not used much, and then try to deploy it and see what breaks. > > >> I don't want us to depend on some random search engines to make a guess >> as to which names are safe to use. > > That's basically how we've been doing it so far. > > I mean, it's not like disallowing people from making up attributes has > stopped everyone from making up attributes. This is already a problem. > > -- > Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL > http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. > Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' >