W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2008

Re: several messages about New Vocabularies in text/html

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 17:11:33 -0400
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: Jeff Schiller <codedread@gmail.com>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, public-html-request@w3.org, Public MathML mailing list <www-math@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OFA8F3D714.329B19BA-ON85257420.0073F6F4-85257420.007469F5@us.ibm.com>

Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote on 04/03/2008 03:24:20 PM:
> On Thu, 3 Apr 2008, Sam Ruby wrote:
> > I maintain that matching on an attribute named "xmlns" with a value of
> > http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" on an element otherwise unknown to HTML5 is

> > an approach that would (a) yield a statistically insignificant number
> > false positives, (b) enable us to trigger the transition to a new
> > and (c) would serve as a model for how new vocabularies are to be
> > introduced.
> I haven't taken a sample of text/html pages that contain such triggers
> yet, but I _have_ done such a sample for MathML, and it showed that for
> that vocabulary we would need some sort of hardcoded list to handle the
> existing content. (Either a whitelist of MathML elements or a blacklist
> HTML elements, but either way we've lost the genericity of the problem
> are trying to solve.)

I disagree that for MathML that you have shown that we would need some sort
of hardcoded list.  The most that you have demonstrated is that a hardcoded
list would suffice for a snapshot of the MathML vocabulary taken at this
point in time.

I am confident that such a hard coded list would not work for SVG, not even
for a snapshot of the vocabulary.  I am hopeful that whatever approach you
chose to accept for SVG will also apply to MathML, and will not further
constrain the development of that vocabulary.

- Sam Ruby
Received on Thursday, 3 April 2008 21:12:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:32 UTC