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

Re: Comments on HTML WG face to face meetings in France Oct 08

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 10:45:51 -0500
Message-ID: <492191AF.7030800@mit.edu>
To: elharo@metalab.unc.edu
CC: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>, public-html <public-html@w3.org>, www-tag@w3.org

Elliotte Harold wrote:
>> data:text/xml,%3C?xml-stylesheet%20href=%22data:text/css,*{font-weight:bold}%22?%3E%3Croot%3Etext%20%3Couter%3Eouter%20%3Cinner%3Einner%3C/outer%3E 
>>
> 
> Up to the application. Feed that URL to any app you like. The app 
> defines what should be done with it. Feed it to a browser, you'll get 
> one thing. Feed it to an app that wants to do somethint else, you'll get 
> something else.

That's not acceptable from my point of view, basically.

> In this specific example, though, I personally don't recognize exactly 
> what you're sending so I'm not sure which specs apply. (Some sort of 
> encoded XML with CSS maybe?)

Here's the same thing without the URL-encoding:

   <?xml-stylesheet href="data:text/css,*{font-weight:bold}"?>
   <root>text <outer>outer <inner>inner</outer>

It's just a PI, then something that starts out looking like XML but has 
a mismatched close tag.  The XML specification doesn't preclude 
construction of a DOM out of this text, and some XML consumers do just 
that.  Others treat the mismatched close tag as a fatal error and do not 
produce a DOM.  The inconsistency is a problem.

> There is no *required* processing, nor should there be.

That sounds like a fundamental disagreement, then.  In the absence of 
required processing you get what happened with HTML4.

-Boris
Received on Monday, 17 November 2008 15:47:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:24 GMT