[whatwg] Thoughts on HTML 5
scampa.giovanni at gmail.com
Tue Dec 16 07:00:23 PST 2008
2008/12/16 Nils Dagsson Moskopp <
nils-dagsson-moskopp at dieweltistgarnichtso.net>
> Am Dienstag, den 16.12.2008, 15:38 +0100 schrieb Giovanni Campagna:
> > Browser assume that author knows XML because he's put an application/*
> > +xml mime type.
> > On the other hand, this assumption cannot be done for blogger, who
> > aren't expected to know XML / XML 1.1 / XHTML 1.0 / HTML5 specs
> > (they're not expected to know about what or w3c either)
> Then they shouldn't write XHTML in the first place ... there *are* some
> good autoformatters which handle stuff for you (think: newline -> <br/>,
> two newlines -> <p>aragraph). Also, WYSIWYG editors should *not* gave
> you the oppontuniy to mess up your code.
In a forum you usually write BBCode (or similar), that is server-side parsed
with the same hacks as the HTML5 parser, while in other context it is
definitely more powerful to write directly HTML
<p>Click on my icon <a href=somewhere.html><img width=88 height=15
is valid HTML although not valid XHTML. Do you mean this with "messing up
> > > Could not save you post, invalid XML markup (Mismatched end tag,
> > expecting <img>, found </p>)
> > > See W3C XML1.1 specification (link to XML spec) for further
> > information about this.
> > Or just "Not well-formed (attribute values must be encoded in double
> > quotes)"
> The current error messages are crap, that is totally right. They could
> certainly be more user-friendly.
Have you got any ideas?
> > You have no page, thus no way to edit!
> The admin interface should be always well-formed, having the offending
> portion in a <textarea> (or similar) for easy editing and an <iframe>
> for viewing.
In any case, it is not allowable for companies to have their site down
because of an user, even for just few minutes (if your lucky and find bug
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the whatwg