[whatwg] several messages about XML syntax and HTML5
julian.reschke at gmx.de
Mon Dec 4 21:57:01 PST 2006
Ian Hickson schrieb:
> On Mon, 4 Dec 2006, Robert Sayre wrote:
>> On 12/4/06, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
>>> It certainly isn't something that it would make sense to encourage.
>> Is this different than what IE does with <canvas>?
> Yes, because with <canvas> the feature has been carefully designed to have
> fallback content so that in browsers that don't support <canvas>, you can
> still see content that represents the same information (assuming authors
> provide it, of course). There's also an implementation of <canvas> for IE.
> And, probably most importantly, <canvas> is defined in a specification
> with exact parsing rules that define how it is to be treated, so if
> Microsoft decide to implement it, they can do so and ensure
> interoperability. None of this applies to sending SVG today as text/html.
So which spec is <canvas> defined in (other the one discussed over here,
which could define SVG-in-HTML as well if the maintainers decided to...)?
Best regards, Julian
More information about the whatwg