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: Sun, 30 Jan 2011 16:47:46 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1PjaRG-0001Pd-Ak@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11910

--- Comment #7 from David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk> 2011-01-30 16:47:45 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)

> The <p> is already mentioned in the polyglot spec, no? 


<p> is mentioned, but not in any way related to the issue in that example.

> HTML5 also mention it in
> the "restrictions on the content model" seciton. It would be simple to provide
> a list of those element that have special parsing attached to them.

You would also have to say exactly what the special parsing rules are, and what
subset of well formed documents produce compatible xml parse trees despite
those rules. This would make the polyglot many many times larger than it
currently is, for very little benefit, and the chance of getting it right would
be close to nil. For conforming documents the rules are irksome but not too
difficult to state, but for non conforming, documents the rules are massively
more complicated.


> 
> Here I think you are mixing things: XML is not alone in discerning between
> "working" (aka "well-formed") and valid (aka "conformance"). HTML has the same
> concept.

Not really, html(5) produces a parse tree for (almost) any input, just some
inputs are declared non conforming.
> 
>  E.g. HTML5 says that it is forbidden to set the value of the img@border to a
> non-zero value. Thus, this is forbidden <img border="9" src="i" alt="i">. We
> can both agree that it is not an issue, with regard to getting the exact same
> DOM, whether @border is set to "9" or "0". 

The fact that there are a few non conforming documents for which it is possible
to say something about xml parsing isn't enough to justify saying anything
about them here.
> 
> If this document is supposed to replace Appendix C, then it must, in my view,
> also describe principles.

I can't imagine any reason to make the document many many times longer just to
tell people how they can use xml tools to make non conforming documents rather
than just saying how to produce conforming documents.

-- 
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 Sunday, 30 January 2011 16:47:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 30 January 2011 16:47:58 GMT