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

Re: ISSUE-41/ACTION-97 decentralized-extensibility

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 05:57:14 -0700
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, Tony Ross <tross@microsoft.com>, Brendan Eich <brendan@mozilla.org>
Message-id: <99BD48DC-EC61-4B5F-8196-962AD9715B1F@apple.com>
To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>

On Oct 6, 2009, at 5:32 AM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:

> Julian Reschke On 09-10-06 11.38:
>
>> Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>>>> I agree that adding something else should be avoided. One way to  
>>>> avoid it would be to align namspaceURI/localName more between  
>>>> text/html and application/xhtml+xml.
>>> namespaceURI and localName are aligned already, in the current  
>>> HTML5 draft. What's different is the parser behavior. HTML parsing  
>>> behavior can't be identical to XML, within compatibility  
>>> constraints. It's an open question how much closer it could get.
>> Yes.
>
> The Microsoft proposal is to allow namespaces only on <body> and  
> children of <body>. This to avoid any negative effects of namespaces  
> used "in the wild" today.

As far as I can tell, the recently posted Microsoft proposal allows  
namespace declarations to appear on any element. There is no  
restriction to <body> or its children.

>
> But if one introduced e.g. a <root> element for declaring of  
> namespaces, then there would be no such effects whatsoever. Also,  
> this would permit some default behavior for the root element to be  
> specified, and thus hopefully easier deal with DOM issues?
>
> For prefixed namespaces, one could do:
>  <root xmlns:svg='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg'>
>
> For default namespace one could do:
>  <root xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg'>
>
> For well known namespaces one could offer a shorter syntax. E.g. a  
> short syntax for prefixed names could be:
>  <root xmlns:svg="[svg]" >
>
> Short syntax for default namespace could use (predefined) CURIEs:
>  <root xmlns="[svg]" >
>  <root [svg] >
>
> The word 'root' is known for many from e.g. CSS. And I think having  
> a root element will allow authors to give more attention to the  
> namespace _URI_, which really is the key.
>
> Thoughts?

HTML already has a root element. It's called <html>.

Regards,
Maciej
Received on Tuesday, 6 October 2009 12:57:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:09 UTC