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

Re: Extensibility strategies, was: Deciding in public (Was: SVGWG SVG-in-HTML proposal)

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2008 09:46:12 +0200
Message-ID: <489410C4.9010608@gmx.de>
To: Justin James <j_james@mindspring.com>
CC: 'Ian Hickson' <ian@hixie.ch>, 'Sam Ruby' <rubys@us.ibm.com>, 'HTML WG' <public-html@w3.org>

Justin James wrote:
> ...
>>> If you wanted to disambiguate your "price" from other people's, you
>> could
>>> use a URI instead:
>>>    <p>The peas cost <span
>> class="http://ns.intertwingly.net/price">$7.99</span>.</p>
>>  > ...
>> Hey, that's an interesting proposal. I haven't seen that before.
> Would using an URI trigger any other behavior, like downloading something from that URI and taking action upon it? Not saying it *should*, just curious if the proposal does that or not.
> ...

Good point. If we had spec text that talks about URIs as class names 
then we should point out that user agents should not dereference them 
automatically (just like in XMLNS, RDF, ...).

>> Anyway: if this is a serious suggestion, we should discuss adding
>> advice
>> to HTML5 telling people that if they choose a URI as class name, they
>> need to be sure that they have the authority to use it.
> Depends on the wording, what if I want to use a 3rd party item (like the external JavaScript libraries calling third-party controls)?

Could you elaborate on that? Are you wondering whether a syntax like 
this could be used to automatically download associated scripts? (to 
which my answer would be: hopefully not :-)

BR, Julian
Received on Saturday, 2 August 2008 07:46:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:36 UTC