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

Re: let authors choose text/html or application/xhtml+xml (detailed review of section 1. Introduction)

From: Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2007 11:56:48 -0500
Message-Id: <13031B3E-5D85-417C-92DF-57A8F330B2CE@robburns.com>
Cc: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
To: Michael A.Puls II <shadow2531@gmail.com>


On Sep 2, 2007, at 6:53 PM, Michael A. Puls II wrote:

>
> On 8/30/07, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> wrote:
>>
>> Regarding this paragraph:
>>
>> "XHTML documents (XML documents using elements from the HTML  
>> namespace)
>> that use the new features described in this specification and that  
>> are
>> served over the wire (e.g. by HTTP) must be sent using an XML MIME  
>> type
>> such as application/xml or application/xhtml+xml and must not be  
>> served
>> as text/html."
>>
>> XHTML documents served as text/html result in interoperable behavior
>> in typical cases, so that constraint is too strong. Please change
>> it to "SHOULD be sent..." and "SHOULD NOT be served...".
>
> The spec already allows a few xmlisms in HTML5, but since using those
> xmlisms makes the document look like XHTML, the MUST requirement seems
> to contradict if you really think about it.

I think to make this clearer we should focus on the MUST instead of  
the MUST NOT. That is we should just say something like:"

"Documents served with an XML media type such as 'application/xml' or  
'application/xhtml+xml' that also make use of the new features  
described in this recommendation MUST conform to the requirements of  
this recommendation for XHTML5 documents. Such documents must also  
conform to the requirements of the XML (1.0 or later) recommendation.  
Documents served with an 'text/html' media type that also make use of  
the new features described in this recommendation MUST conform to the  
requirements of this recommendation for HTML5 documents."

This way we avoid the intricacies of whether the document meets some  
or all of the opposite criteria. In other words there may be a  
document that meets both the HTML5 requirements and the XHTML5 (and  
XML) requirements and would therefore satisfy both sets of  
requirements. Though we could have a section or chapter devoted to  
the topic, I don't think we should get into the whole CSS and DOM  
issues in the introduction.

Take care,
Rob
Received on Monday, 3 September 2007 16:57:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:07 GMT