[whatwg] several messages about XML syntax and HTML5
ian at hixie.ch
Tue Dec 5 17:07:16 PST 2006
On Tue, 5 Dec 2006, Sam Ruby wrote:
> > Case in point:
> > http://www.intertwingly.net/blog/2006/12/01/The-White-Pebble
> > In IE, there's some stray "XHTML HTML" and "XHTML HTML XML" text. This
> > isn't acceptable to most people. It certainly isn't something that it
> > would make sense to encourage. The worst possible outcome here would
> > be for browsers like IE to start trying to parse this "SVG" in
> > text/html, because the lack of any sensible parsing rules for it would
> > guarentee that we're faced with even more "tag soup", thus undoing all
> > the work that the HTML5 spec is trying to do to get us past that.
> You are aware that I like to "tweak" IE users, right?
> With the current technology, this could have been avoided with a single
> div and two lines of CSS. And I am most capable of doing that.
But that wouldn't help, e.g., Lynx users.
> In the longer run, I do believe that an architected simple rule like:
> xmlns attributes are invalid on HTML elements except html, and
> when found on unrecognized attributes imply style="display:none"
> unless you recognize the value of this attribute.
> ... would channel those with insane desires to make extensions into
> doing so in a manner that is harmless. Such a rule might take a year or
> two to get widely deployed, but the worst feet-draggers won't be
> affected any worse than they were in the days when <table> was young.
There are millions of documents that would be "broken" by such a rule,
so browser vendors couldn't actually deploy that, sadly. :-(
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg