Read more.Quote:
So what about that shiny new logo?
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
So what about that shiny new logo?
Except for developers who are trying to make sure that their websites meet an ever-changing standard, of course ;) :p There needs to be some kind of standards path and some reassurance for web devs that their fully-compliant site today will still be fully-compliant in a couple of year's time, rather than have the standards changed within months and need to be constantly redeveloping just to maintain compliance. I wouldn't like to see a standard where items were inserted and removed every few months as fashions in web development change...Quote:
Treating the HTML spec as a living document that can more easily be updated seems like a positive move.
Yay for shooting moving targets! Always fun, that.
I think it means that they can add things rather than go back and make changes.
I'm sure that's the intention, but if you have a standard that only gets added to it will quickly become bloated and unwieldy (and you'll end up with the possibility of two wildly different implementations which are both "standards compliant"). So at some point there has to be the facility to deprecate and remove things, and the question is how that's going to be managed. Also having a standard that's easy to add to means it's just as easy to make a bad addition as a good one. I'm all for the idea that the standards path needs to move quicker (after all, we're effectively still conforming to HTML4, which is - what, 12 years old now? More?), but the concept of a "living" standards document rings all my alarm bells...Quote:
Originally Posted by BullDogg
quite, its better to have them identifiable so at least developers know whats what. sounds like no version control will be applied at all?Quote:
Originally Posted by scaryjim
bit like freeview in uk, now half the older boxes wont work or are limited to now/next epg... yet all comply to standards, just the standards have been altered or evolved with little regard to proper control!
Well it will probably end up like XHTML and CSS 2 with IE not supporting a load of it
They also want to kill all the DAB radios, so we can have DAB+ which does actually sound better than FM. Shame really some suppliers (roberts) sell radios limited to DAB in the UK because we don't support DAB+ and it would require additional licensing costs.Quote:
Originally Posted by rabbid