jg21 writes "Web 2.0 Journal brings to our attention Yahoo! Architect and JSON inventor Douglas Crockford's latest ideas to fix HTML. Not a fan of HTML 5, which is still just an Editor's Draft and not endorsed by W3C yet, Crock puts forward ten ideas that in his view would provide extensibility without complexity, adding that the simplification of HTML he is proposing would reduce the cost of training of web developers and incorporates the best practices of AJAX development. [From the article: "The problems with HTML will not be solved by making it bigger and more complicated. I think instead we should generalize what it does well, while excising features that are problematic. HTML can be made into a general application delivery format without disrupting its original role as a document format."]" Link to Original Source
This discussion was created for logged-in users only, but now has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Make sure you have about 2 minutes to spare. You're going to need about that long to read it from beginning to end. What you'll probably find is that he hasn't really solved any of the major issues plaguing HTML or even thought through many of the problems and use-cases that HTML 5 is trying to solve. In fact, his entire "design" can be summed up with the following sentence: "Let's get rid of HTML features that I believe cause probl
Both these breaks XML compatibility, which breaks passing and validating with XML tools (and, more significantly, transforming and mashing with XML tools; and with no real benefit.
Whatever we do with HTML from here on in, it costs virtually nothing to keep it XML compliant, and it benefits us all hugely to do so. Let's not sell that pass.
Not Impressed (Score:2)
Make sure you have about 2 minutes to spare. You're going to need about that long to read it from beginning to end. What you'll probably find is that he hasn't really solved any of the major issues plaguing HTML or even thought through many of the problems and use-cases that HTML 5 is trying to solve. In fact, his entire "design" can be summed up with the following sentence: "Let's get rid of HTML features that I believe cause probl
Making things incompatible is not 'fixing' (Score:2)
I took one look at this and said 'no'.
Because:
Both these breaks XML compatibility, which breaks passing and validating with XML tools (and, more significantly, transforming and mashing with XML tools; and with no real benefit.
Whatever we do with HTML from here on in, it costs virtually nothing to keep it XML compliant, and it benefits us all hugely to do so. Let's not sell that pass.