[html4all] ALT issue redux
Patrick H. Lauke
redux at splintered.co.uk
Mon Feb 4 16:17:27 PST 2008
John Foliot wrote:
> If the new spec removes the previous mandatory obligation for @alt in
> XHTML1, how then can it be backward compatible to XHTML1, as it removes a
> requirement previously obliged?
It is backwards compatible because valid XHTML1 will always also be
valid HTML5. Also, browsers that currently support XHTML1 won't choke on
missing @alt. Backwards compatibility (and the "two serialisations"
thing) doesn't mean that HTML5 can simply be converted down to XHTML1
(in which case making a mandatory attribute optional *would* be a breach).
I'm not defending the decision to make @alt optional, mind...just
working out the logic that lets HTML WG do it while still following the
backwards-compatibility principle.
P
--
Patrick H. Lauke
______________________________________________________________
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
http://redux.deviantart.com
______________________________________________________________
Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force
http://webstandards.org/
______________________________________________________________
More information about the List_HTML4all.org
mailing list