W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > January 2011

[Bug 11910] @id values in polyglot markup should be XML-valid (or not?)

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 16:40:06 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1PirMk-0004YF-K3@jessica.w3.org>

--- Comment #3 from David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk> 2011-01-28 16:40:06 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)

> So, for example, if an author was using XHTML 1.0 doctype, what then?

I don't think that it should mention validity at all. If authors want to make
sure their documents are valid there are plently of tools to do that without
consulting this polyglot spec.

It would be fruitless to try to enumerate the extra constraints one must
satisfy to ensure that a conforming html document that uses a legacy but
conforming doctype is valid xml.

@id being Name is a tiny fraction of it, also you'd have to not use any new
elements such as canvas, and the usage of all other elements would have to
match the dtd in addition to what the html(5) spec says. So long as the
document sticks to the single aim of specifying how to get conforming html
documents to have equivalent parse trees if parsed as XML, then xml validity is


Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 28 January 2011 16:40:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 16:31:04 UTC