W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > November 2012

Re: Polyglot Markup Formal Objection Rationale

From: Smylers <Smylers@stripey.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 14:13:08 +0000
To: public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <20121105141308.GG2391@stripey.com>
Leif Halvard Silli writes:

> Smylers, Mon, 5 Nov 2012 12:37:37 +0000:
> > The definition of the term "polyglot markup" is in a section explicitly
> > marked as non-normative in the current draft spec, despite being linked
> > to from elsewhere in that document as a definition:
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-html-polyglot-20121025/#dfn-polyglot-markup
> > I think it's confusing that this definition _isn't_ normative, and I
> > don't understand what linking to a non-normative definition means, or
> > how there can be normative requirements for creating something which
> > doesn't itself have a normative definition.
> I believe that it is common, in specs, to denote principles (because 
> this is a principle and not a definition, I would say) as 
> non-normative.

I have no problem with there being non-normative principles distinct
from normative definitions.

But currently the phrase "polyglot markup" elsewhere in the document
links to the sentence in the non-normative introduction, which has the
term in <dfn> tags. That certainly gives the impression that the spec
intends that sentence to be the definition of the phrase "polyglot

> I believe this is also the way the HTML5 spec is structured.

The HTML5 spec has a non-normative introduction, but it doesn't attempt
to define terms in that introduction. All terms used are defined,
normatively, in later sections.


New series of TV puzzle show 'Only Connect' (some questions by me)
Mondays at 20:30 on BBC4, or iPlayer: http://www.bbc.co.uk/onlyconnect
Received on Monday, 5 November 2012 14:13:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 16:26:13 UTC