W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2009

Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong"

From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 10:15:52 +0100
Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, plh@w3.org
Message-Id: <7EE19BBA-CF19-423D-8D06-906719A0E845@berjon.com>
To: Robert J Burns <rob@robburns.com>

On Feb 11, 2009, at 21:47 , Robert J Burns wrote:
> However, HTML5 has introduced namespace collisions all on its own so  
> that things like the 'small' element mean two different things  
> within the same namespace. In other words a name collision where two  
> separate elements share the same name. This is the type of thing a  
> namespace should be avoiding or it ceases to have any meaning.

I really don't understand your point? Are you saying that elements  
with different semantics with the same fully qualified name are always  
bad? So long as they can be distinguished by context, it really  
doesn't matter. The only thing it breaks is DTD validation and no one  
sane would ever care about that.

What matters is if a v1 implementation cannot do anything useful with  
a v2 document (and worse, vice-versa) or if an implementation cannot  
usefully distinguish between two incompatible languages sharing the  
same language.

Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
     Feel like hiring me? Go to http://robineko.com/
Received on Thursday, 12 February 2009 09:16:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:42 UTC