>>>>> HTML4 became a W3C Recommendation in 1997. While it continues to serve
>>>>> as a rough guide to many of the core features of HTML, it does not
>>>>> provide enough information to build implementations that interoperate
>>>>> with each other and, more importantly, with a critical mass of
>>>>> deployed content.
>>>>
>>>> This may be generally accepted by some members of the community, yet
>>>> it does not let outsiders know what what actually wrong with the way
>>>> HTML4 was specified. This is really important, because it underpins
>>>> why HTML5 is such a large spec and why it covers so much stuff. Can
>>>> you please clearly list the deficiencies which HTML4 has and how HTML5
>>>> has attempted to overcome those (i.e., what processes are actually in
>>>> place to avoid the mistakes of HTML4 being remade in HTML5).
>>>
>>> I don't think that's of relevance to this document, but it would
>>> certainly be interesting to have such a document. The audience of such a
>>> document would not be authors though, I would think.
>>
>> I don't see how this cannot be relevant to this document. This, in
>> fact, _is_ the whole point of this document. That is at the core of
>> the fundamental difference between HTML4 and HTML5. I would again
>> request that the document clearly list the deficiencies which HTML4
>> has and how HTML5 has attempted to overcome those.
>
> It is not at all the whole point of this document. The point is to point
> out what is new and has changed compared to HTML4, because authors know
> HTML4. Explaining how HTML4 was completely inadequate is interesting
> research and might be of use to people writing specifications, but for
> everyone else it is moot as we have HTML5 now.

I respectfully disagree. I call on the WG to make a formal decision 
about this matter. I would also add that writers of specification are 
also authors of HTML, such as you and I.