Notice of CFC: Make previous versions of HTML and XHTML obsolete

# Léonie Watson (10 days ago)

This is notice that a Call For Consensus (CFC) has been posted here: w3c/WebPlatformWG#86

Please respond to the CFC by end of day on Tuesday 18th July 2017.

Thank you.

Contact us to advertise here
# Léonie Watson (3 days ago)

Reminder that this CFC closes at the end of today. If you haven't done it already, please take time to respond.

# Léonie Watson (2 days ago)

This is notice that this CFC is now closed. It received numerous positive responses, and two partial objections.

The CFC passed, but the response to the objections and other details can be found in the official notice: w3c/WebPlatformWG#86

# Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL (2 days ago)

Leonie,

I think it would have been best, and I would have appreciated you receiving my answer to your response before finalizing this CFC, as, I was not satisfied with the responses to my objection.

HTML 5.0 is only 3 years old and 5.1 is less than 1.

No, I do not agree, but I suppose I can object when it goes to the AC, which would be unfortunate. I am not certain that Knowbility will formally object, but there is no reason to obsolete the current 5.0 specs.

​​​​​ katie

Katie Haritos-Shea Principal ICT Accessibility Architect (WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA)

Cell: 703-371-5545 | ryladog@gmail.com | Oakton, VA | LinkedIn Profile | Office: 703-371-5545 | @ryladog

NOTE: The content of this email should be construed to always be an expression of my own personal independent opinion, unless I identify that I am speaking on behalf of Knowbility, as their AC Rep at the W3C - and - that my personal email never expresses the opinion of my employer, Deque Systems.

# Léonie Watson (a day ago)

On 19/07/2017 23:11, Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL wrote:

Leonie,

I think it would have been best, and I would have appreciated you receiving my answer to your response before finalizing this CFC, as, I was not satisfied with the responses to my objection.

We waited 24 hours after the CFC ended before posting our response, but we understand the point you're making.

HTML 5.0 is only 3 years old and 5.1 is less than 1.

This is true. HTML5.1 is also a more accurate reflection of what works on the web today, and it fixes several of the errors uncovered in HTML5.0, so recommending (but not forcing) people to use it seems like a helpful thing to do.

# Alastair Campbell (a day ago)

Leonie,

I have to admit my first reaction to obsoleting 5.0 was surprise, however, I think it will help with a common misconception.

People outside the W3C tend to assume things are standardised then implemented, whereas (and please forgive the simplification) the reality is more a case of standardising once things are implemented.

Marking the latest HTML spec as the ‘one to look at’ (by marking all previous ones as not) is a better reflection of reality, so I think there is a good reason to obsolete the 5.0 version. Therefore, I support the change.

# David MacDonald (4 hours ago)

+1

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 7:22 AM Alastair Campbell acampbell@nomensa.com

wrote:

Hi Katie, Leonie,

I have to admit my first reaction to obsoleting 5.0 was surprise, however, I think it will help with a common misconception.

People outside the W3C tend to assume things are standardised then implemented, whereas (and please forgive the simplification) the reality is more a case of standardising once things are implemented.

Marking the latest HTML spec as the ‘one to look at’ (by marking all previous ones as not) is a better reflection of reality, so I think there is a good reason to obsolete the 5.0 version. Therefore, I support the change.

Cheers,

-Alastair

--

Cheers, David MacDonald

Can**Adapt Solutions Inc.

Tel: 613.235.4902

LinkedIn [http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100](http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100)

twitter.com/davidmacd

GitHub [https://github.com/DavidMacDonald](https://github.com/DavidMacDonald)

www.Can-Adapt.com [http://www.can-adapt.com/](http://www.can-adapt.com/)

  • Adapting the web to all users*
  • Including those with disabilities*

If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy [http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html](http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html)

Want more features?

Request early access to our private beta of readable email premium.