W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-xml@w3.org > August 2011

RE: Suggested revised text for HTML/XML report intro

From: Robert Leif <rleif@rleif.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 08:00:18 -0700
To: "'Noah Mendelsohn'" <nrm@arcanedomain.com>, <public-html-xml@w3.org>
Cc: "'Larry Masinter'" <LMM@acm.org>, "'Norman Walsh'" <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Message-ID: <02b701cc5837$6313cf70$293b6e50$@rleif.com>
I would like to add the following sentence. 

Since XHTML5 has not been completely specified, no conclusion concerning
interfacing it with XML can presently be made.

Thank you.

Bob Leif

-----Original Message-----
From: public-html-xml-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-xml-request@w3.org]
On Behalf Of Noah Mendelsohn
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 12:48 PM
To: public-html-xml@w3.org
Cc: Larry Masinter
Subject: Suggested revised text for HTML/XML report intro

 

At one point recently I mentioned to Norm that I thought some of the
concerns about the scope of our effort, and the lack of deeper proposals for
improvements, might be addressed by improvements to the introduction of the
report. Norm asked me to suggest text, and I offer this as a starting point.
It should be clear from the first and last paragraphs where it fits in the
existing text.

 

==================================================

Against the backdrop of this tension, the TAG formed this Task Force in
order to explore how interoperability between HTML and XML could be
improved, and this report sets out the results of the Task Force's work.

 

The Task Force explored some approaches that would provide higher levels of
compatibility than are discussed in the sections below. For example,
consideration was given to proposals to produce new versions of the XML
specification that would retain significant compatibility with XML as
deployed today, but would provide more HTML-compatible processing, e.g. for
documents that are not well formed. Unfortunately, the task force failed to
discover any such approach that we expect would be widely accepted in
practice. As shown by the failed attempt to deploy XML 1.1, XML is valued in
part because of the high degree of compatibility among XML tool chains; if
an XML document is processable by one application or tool, chances are
excellent that it will work with others. Thus, the introduction of a new
class of more HTML-compatible XML tends to undercut the very property that
XML users value most: the new documents may be rejected or misinterpreted by
existing XML tools and applications. Similarly, efforts to extend or adapt
HTML5 to become more XML-compatible seem unlikely to meet with sufficiently
widespread acceptance, at least at this time. So, with reluctance, the task
force reports that no structural changes could be identified that would
significantly increase the compatibility of the two stacks, and also be
deployable in practice.

 

The task force did carefully analyze a set of use cases, and concluded that
substantial opportunities do exist today for using HTML and XML technologies
together.  Details are provided in the sections below. Readers are
particularly encouraged to report additional use cases that they feel are
not represented or specific examples where the solutions outlined are not
appropriate.

 

==================================================

 

I hope this is helpful, at least as a starting point. I also think that
Larry's concerns may be somewhat better addressed if we could provide some
deeper discussion and better illustrative examples of some of the polyglot
issues, I.e. what's likely to work, what's not, and where we can reasonably
expect adoption. I'm afraid I am not sufficiently knowledgeable of the
details to offer anything specific.

 

Noah

 

 

Thank you
Received on Thursday, 11 August 2011 15:00:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 11 August 2011 15:00:52 GMT