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

Re: Microsoft's "I mean it" content-type parameter

From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 14:00:13 +0100
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <20080704130013.GC29484@shareable.org>

Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Jul 2008, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> > 
> > (But last time I looked, it didn't handle slop the same way as certain 
> > major browsers, but rather according to what the HTML5 authors thought 
> > would be sensible, so that part seems doomed to be not implemented 
> > according to spec, but as Yet Another incompatible compatibility layer 
> > in real browsers.)
> 
> Do you have any specifics? If there's interoperability on an area that the 
> spec disagrees with, I should fix it.

I did a couple of years ago when I was looking into sloppy HTML
syntactic interoperability quite deeply, but that's long gone.  I was
particularly into reading Mozilla and libxml source, and a few other
things, at the time.  I really don't have the time to get back to that
now.

If there's active interest in the HTML5 spec matching implemented
behaviours in browsers and other widespread HTML parsers, it would be
helpful to make that clear, and invite comments on those differences.

Last time I saw some of the HTML parsing differences, I read the HTML5
comments where folk were devising new, robust parsing algorithms that
would produce a DOM from tag soup, but seemingly based on choosing a
neat algorithm to get a sensible result.  That put me off writing up
and contributing my observations, as I figured that meant HTML5's plan
wasn't specifically to model browser compatibility behaviour in the
syntax department.  I didn't have the energy to push that, study the
differences, write it up, if it wasn't on the agenda anyway.

-- Jamie
Received on Friday, 4 July 2008 13:00:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:19 GMT