Two HTML Standards Diverge in a Wood

Technically there is still only one "HTML5" standard; the W3C one.

WHATWG are editing the "HTML Living Standard". Unlike the W3C model, there aren't version numbers or set phases that the spec must go through. Instead there is a process of continuous development; fixing bugs as they are found and continually iterating new features in response to the evolving needs of the web. This process is modeled around the way that browsers are actually developed, and should help innovation on the web keep pace with proprietary platforms.

The goal of the W3C version is somewhat different; it is essentially a branch aimed at stabilisation (likely at the expense of accuracy) in order that there is a well defined set of technologies covered by the W3C Patent Policy. It is also governed by a somewhat different (consensus based) decision making policy compared to the WHATWG version (the editor specs what people are willing to implement). History suggests that any differences that arise are most likely to be in things that don't affect UA interoperability but concern the definition of a valid document.

So the net effect of this change is that we will once again have a version of the HTML spec being developed using the system (and at the speed) that gave us HTML5 in the first place.

> Anything is possible, but we remain hopeful that that won’t happen, at least in part because the W3C standard is more of a branch than a fork.

In terms of VCSes, it's essentially a release branch, with "HTML 5" being the eventual endpoint (tag) of it.

We've sort of been through that some 10 years ago, with the XHTML vs. HTML4, which people originally tried to conform to both, then consolidate, then threw XHTML out the window, because practicality beats purity.

History does not exactly repeat, but it rhymes really well.

This isn't a problem. W3C is working on the HTML5 standard while WHATWG is working on the "HTML Living Standard" or what you might call HTML-HEAD or HTML6-beta. http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/

This sounds a lot scarier than in actually is. It is highly unlikely that one vendor will stick with the W3C and another with the WHATWG. (Yeah, I care more about what vendors will do than what standards bodies do.) I think cross-browser compatibility will keep increasing, as it is doing right now. (The three way split in market share helps.)

>What some developers fear is that down the road the two >specs will diverge in significant ways and HTML will become >a messy set of forked standards and varying browser support >that lands us back in the bad old days of IE 6

This is what I'm worried about myself, but I'd like to think that anyone involved with either parties would work together to ensure that it didn't.

Hard to believe that they really decided that this is the best way to go forward given all the HTML standard troubles we already have and had in the past.

This must be killed RIGHT NOW.

This sort of process does more damage to technological innovation than almost anything else I can think of (besides the music and film industry). Look at the state of Unix for example. A free, powerful operating system should be a no brainer for anyone. Until you ask yourself a few basic questions, like which flavour, and religious wars break out.

If Unix or Linux could have limited itself to a far smaller subset, it would likely have taken over the world by now.

This is why the world needs people like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Linus et al.

I shudder when I think of the type of damage this sort of thing can do to HTML and web technology.