2012
Apple doesn’t just do nice device experiences, their SDK and documentation are masterclass too « mimozar blog
The number of concepts and technologies that a developer must learn before they can write solid HTML code is astonishing.
L'HTML-LS, c'est du code sans code, de la bouillie à chat, pour faire plaisir à Hixie.
WTFWG | TimKadlec.com
The truth is it has always been this way with the WHATWG. As Shelly, John and others elsewhere have pointed out, this has happened a bunch of times before. This is par for the course. It’s not a “WHATWG” issue so much as it is an “Ian Hickson” issue. Ian has done a lot of (commendable) hard work getting the HTML spec into better shape over the years, but the fact of the matter is he makes very strange decisions too. He’s not there because he builds websites, or because he has a good relationship with the community, or that he follows his own processes (ha!), or he’s good at taking a consensus view, or anything like that. He’s there because the W3C failed so badly with HTML (see: XHTML 2.0), and Hickson editing the spec worked for vendors. Not you.
La WHAT Task Force n'a jamais été faite pour le Web, c'est juste une coalition des anti-Internet Explorer.
2010
Bug 10661 – use an ISO 639-2 specified language for HTML5 documents
i once had a sense of humor -- then i started working on HTML5... regardless of
humor, the natural language definition of the w3c document should be either
"en" or "en-us"
[hybi] HyBi WG update
this note is against the IETF common practice, so we invite Ian to
remove it.
Ian Hickson : l'Anelka de la spécification.
Re: Change Proposals, objections, and the Decision Policy from Roy T. Fielding on 2010-06-15 ([email protected] from June 2010)
Ian's arguments are entirely based on browser behavior, when it
suits him, and entirely based on speculation when it doesn't.
We have had several discussions on terminology and language
definition for which he has shown no interest in consistency.
We have argued about URI and URL algorithms for which his claim
of browser implementation has turned out to be utterly false.
We are still arguing about the definition of Content-Language
as a pragma in HTML5, even though that definition is technically
wrong, not implemented by the majority of browsers let alone
any of the thousand or so content management systems, actively
harmful to deployed content, disagrees with the normative
MIME and HTTP definitions, breaks the principle of orthogonality
that is core to Web architecture, and even manages to misuse
the term "pragma" for something that is very clearly metadata.
Euh... dtg ?
