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

Re: Choosing name for XML serialization (Was: Re: HTML5 differences from HTML4 editor's draft (XHTML5 and XHTML2))

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 20:50:01 -0700
Message-Id: <AF64F19D-DDCD-419D-9CCC-DD13340A9902@apple.com>
Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
To: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>


On Jun 21, 2007, at 8:03 PM, Karl Dubost wrote:

>
>
> Le 21 juin 2007 à 19:12, Jirka Kosek a écrit :
>> But shouldn't this be resolved now rather then later? It will be  
>> quite
>> confusing to users if two groups will in parallel develop "future
>> version of XHTML" or "maintain XHTML namespace".
>
> Given what I'm reading below. The HTML 5 Spec doesn't maintain the  
> namespace.

I think you're misreading. What you describe below applies only to  
the HTML serialization, not the XML serialization. For the XML  
serialization, the namespace is "http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml". And  
that's needed to remain compatible with XHTML 1.0, and changing it in  
HTML5 would be unacceptable. What's given below is to make it easier  
to make documents which conform to both serializations.

  - Maciej

>
> [[[
> Though it has absolutely no effect and no meaning, the html  
> element, in HTML documents, may have an xmlns attribute specified,  
> if, and only if, it has the exact value "http://www.w3.org/1999/ 
> xhtml". This does not apply to XML documents.
>
> In HTML, the xmlns attribute has absolutely no effect. It is  
> basically a talisman. It is allowed merely to make migration to and  
> from XHTML mildly easier. When parsed by an HTML parser, the  
> attribute ends up in the null namespace, not the "http://www.w3.org/ 
> 2000/xmlns/" namespace like namespace declaration attributes in XML  
> do.
>
> In XML, an xmlns attribute is part of the namespace declaration  
> mechanism, and an element cannot actually have an xmlns attribute  
> in the null namespace specified.
> ]]] -- HTML 5
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/#the-html
> Fri, 22 Jun 2007 01:46:51 GMT
>
>
> * For the HTML version. It has no effect and can't be omitted.
> * So the question is the namespace for the serialization of HTML 5  
> as xml.
>   Another possibility is to choose a different namespace for the  
> xml serialization. Then no conflicts with XHTML 2 WG on the namespace.
>
>   For the name and given the new nature of HTML 5 (Web applications  
> oriented), there might be two possible strategies.
>
> * A long (useless) fight between the two camps. Plus a lot of  
> communication to handle in the Web community with regards to  
> questions. As the current staff contact, I'm not very inclined of  
> having to coordinate between two groups that much polarized ;) not  
> good for the stress level.
> * Choosing another path and changing the name altogether with  
> something more aligned with the idea of what the language is a  
> language for Open Web Applications.
>
>
> [[[
> The World Wide Web's markup language has always been HTML. HTML was  
> primarily designed as a language for semantically describing  
> scientific documents, although its general design and adaptations  
> over the years has enabled it to be used to describe a number of  
> other types of documents.
>
> The main area that has not been adequately addressed by HTML is a  
> vague subject referred to as Web Applications. This specification  
> attempts to rectify this, while at the same time updating the HTML  
> specifications to address issues raised in the past few years.
> ]]] -- HTML 5
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/#introduction
> Fri, 22 Jun 2007 01:46:51 GMT
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
> W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead
>   QA Weblog - http://www.w3.org/QA/
>      *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
>
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 22 June 2007 03:50:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:01 GMT