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

Re: Why HTML should be taught as HTML without pretending it is XML

From: Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 21:19:27 -0500
Message-Id: <EB6B58EF-9299-49AD-96E6-C83F71AE13BC@robburns.com>
To: public-html WG <public-html@w3.org>


On Jul 23, 2007, at 5:21 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:

>
>
> On Jul 23, 2007, at 11:21 AM, Robert Burns wrote:

>> It certainly is a matter of consistency. If one sticks with only  
>> non-namespace method calls, it will work with all three of those  
>> approaches (unless you're saying that a later getElementById()  
>> will not work for that element created by createElement())  Again,  
>> that's where the consistency comes in: consistently using non- 
>> namespace method calls (and of course staying away from compound  
>> documents) .
>
> In an XHTML document and in cases where createElement() creates  
> elements in the null namespace, using createElement() won't work.  
> The default stylesheet won't apply, non-stylesheet rendering rules  
> and behaviors for special elements (like <input>, <style>, <link>,  
> <form>) won't apply, and HTML-specific scripting interfaces won't  
> be available.

Yes, but as the thread reveals, that's only Webkit that would be  
effected and WebKit has since been "fixed". With WebKit changed, I'll  
go back to my original position: that is that consistency is what  
matters.  Although we are off-topic; the threads was about xml-like  
syntax deployed as text/html and not as XML.

Take care,
Rob
Received on Tuesday, 24 July 2007 02:19:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:02 GMT