W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > July 2007

Re: review of "The root element" subsection

From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 14:21:11 +0200
To: "Robert Burns" <rob@robburns.com>
Cc: "Andrew Sidwell" <takkaria@gmail.com>, "HTML Working Group" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.tu80llxkidj3kv@hp-a0a83fcd39d2.palace.opera.no>

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 12:43:44 +0200, Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com> wrote:

>> No. It is not a requirement for UAs. The requirements for UAs are:
>>    http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#determining0
> I wasn't asking about the UA requirements, I was asking if there was any  
> research on the current behavior (that we're trying to be backwards  
> compatible with).

There was. It is documented in the section referenced above.


>> Perhaps, but it isn't compatible with existing UAs.
> Do we already have some tests on this?

We do now... ;-)


>>> Pre-parsers will be able to find the value more easily
>> Not really. They still have to look for encoding information in meta  
>> elements too. Adding more places they have to look doesn't make it  
>> simpler.
> Well adding:
> A sequence of bytes starting with: 0x3C, 0x68 or 0x48, 0x54 or 0x74,  
> 0x4D or 0x6D, 0x4C or 0x6C, and finally one of 0x09, 0x0A, 0x0B, 0x0C,  
> 0x0D, 0x20 (case-insensitive ASCII '<html' followed by a space)
> doesn't seem to be that much of hardship: neither adding it to the  
> pseudo part of the spec, nor the methods already in a UA preparser.

Adding things to the algorithm doesn't make the algorithm simpler  
(regardless of the amount being added).

>> How does requiring an attribute on the root instead of on a meta  
>> element that is first child of head reduce the risk of the encoding  
>> information being in the wrong place?
> Its just simpler to deal with attributes. When a separate element  
> doesn't add anything to the expressiveness of the language it simply  
> adds complexity and room for authoring error.

I won't argue with that.

>>> Also there will be less author error in placing the meta element in  
>>> the incorrect order.
>> How can you tell?
> If you can tell me how you can tell it there won'' be less error, then  
> I'd have an easier time responding to the question. Is there some reason  
> for the straight nay-saying?

I didn't say there won't be less error.

>> The benefits seem weak to me compared to the drawbacks (not compatible  
>> with existing UAs, complicates implementation).
> It hardly complicates the implementations. I would agree that the XML  
> serialization has already solved this in a much more elegant manner. And  
> since this is a long-term solution, the text/html serialization might  
> disappear before anyone had the chance to take advantage of this new  
> feature. It's only strength would come from text/html sticking around  
> for some length of time.

Even if it didn't complicate implementation, it still isn't compatible  
with current UAs, which is the main drawback.

Simon Pieters
Opera Software
Received on Tuesday, 10 July 2007 12:21:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:24 UTC