[whatwg] We should not throw DOM Consistency and Infoset compatibility under the bus
yuhongbao_386 at hotmail.com
Fri Jan 11 15:38:43 PST 2013
Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Jan 2013, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>> Hixie wrote in https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18669#c31 :
>> > I think it's fine for this not to work in XML, or require XML changes,
>> > or use an attribute like xml:component="" in XML. It's not going to be
>> > used in XML much anyway in practice. I've already had browser vendors
>> > ask me how they can just drop XML support; I don't think we can, at
>> > least not currently, but that's the direction things are going in, not
>> > the opposite.
>> This attitude bothers me. A lot.
>> I understand that supporting XML alongside HTML is mainly a burden for
>> browser vendors and I understand that XML currently doesn't get much
>> love from browser vendors.
> Not just browser vendors. Authors rarely if ever use XML for HTML either.
I know. XHTML, along with DOM Level 2, are my favorite features to mention
when talking about IE8 as a boat anchor, because both are more than 10 years
old now! The lack of DOM Level 2 support is probably why jQuery 2.0 no
longer supports IE8.
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/We-should-not-throw-DOM-Consistency-and-Infoset-compatibility-under-the-bus-tp34887132p34890189.html
Sent from the whatwg.org - whatwg mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
More information about the whatwg