Le 6 oct. 06 à 10:02, Ian Hickson a écrit : > On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 karl@w3.org wrote: >> # Similarly, XBL elements (other than the xbl element itself) that >> do not >> # have a correct xbl element as an ancestor are in error too, and UAs >> # must ignore them, treating them as they would any arbitrary >> # semantic-free XML element. >> >> What is a semantic-free XML element? There is no definition for this. > > It's an element that has no semantics. Where's the ambiguity? Why does > this need a definition? The term is self-explanatory. > >> How does it differ in the processing for User agents? > > Differ from what? > > >> What a user agent is supposed to do with something which is not s >> semantic-free XML element? > > Whatever the element's semantics are defined as requiring the UA to > do. I > don't really understand the question here. Semantic-free with regards to the XBL specification or with regards to the user agent. Let's take a user agent HappySurf implementing XBL and SVG only. * The "xbl" element has the semantics defined in XBL specification * The "boom" element has no semantics with regards the user agent (maybe somewhere in an unknown spec) * The "svg" element has the semantics defined in SVG specification Is the "svg" element "semantic free" for HappySurf user agent? -- Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/ W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead QA Weblog - http://www.w3.org/QA/ *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***Received on Friday, 6 October 2006 03:31:12 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:10:20 GMT