W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January 2013

Re: TAG Decision on Rescinding the request to the HTML WG to develop a polyglot guide

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 12:56:14 +0100
To: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>
Cc: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, "www-tag@w3.org List" <www-tag@w3.org>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
Message-id: <20130119125614659357.47a71e46@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Hi Noah and Henri,

The polyglot markup community has itself focused on clarifying the 
scope of Polyglot Markup. I am here thinking about Sam’s bug 19925, 
which seeks to emphasize that polyglot markup should be seen as an 
implementation of the robustness principle.[1] (And while that bug 
hasn't been resolved yet, the spec already says some words about scope.)

Regarding Henri’s bug 20707,[2] then - the way I perceive it, it has 
very little focus on the robustness principle. Taken further: Since his 
bug suggest that the spec takes in TAG’s wording, this means that I 
don't think TAG’s wording focus much on the robustness principle. Which 
is why I have proposed to add one line of text to the TAG's wording.[3]

My justification for that line is this: The goal of polyglot markup is 
the *end result*. The process towards that end result that is *not* 
important. To use the polyglot format means that the author stretches 
his or her efforts in order to do *more* than required by each "mono 
format", in order to meet *all* the ways the document could possibly be 
consumed. First and foremost, this means that, when authoring XHTML5 
documents, the document is made sure to be be HTML5-compatible as well. 
The author could very well use a an XML tool with a HTML parser in 
order to produce this end result.

With this clarification, I hope the TAG understands why I suggest 
adding that line and is OK with it.

[1] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=19925

[2] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20707

[3] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20707#c1


Leif Halvard Silli

Noah Mendelsohn, Fri, 18 Jan 2013 18:28:54 -0500:
> Thank you Henri. I do not speak formally for the TAG yet, but it 
> appears to me that your bugzilla filing recommends exactly the course 
> that the TAG suggested. Thank you for being so responsive to our 
> request.
> 
> I will review this with the TAG at an upcoming meeting/call to make 
> sure that they too are satisfied with the direction signaled in your 
> bugzilla entry. I would be grateful if you or the HTML WG chairs 
> would alert us when the group makes a final decision on the 
> disposition of your bugzilla request.
> 
> Thank you again.
> 
> Noah
> Chair: W3C Technical Architecture Group
> 
> On 1/18/2013 7:14 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Noah Mendelsohn 
>> <nrm@arcanedomain.com> wrote:
>>> Henri:
>>> 
>>> The TAG has discussed your request [1] that the TAG rescind its request to
>>> the HTML WG to "create a document in TR space that specifies how one can
>>> create a set of bits which can be served EITHER as text/html OR as
>>> application/xhtml+xml, which will work identically in a browser in both
>>> cases".
>> 
>> Thank you.
>> 
>>> We support the publication of
>>> the Polyglot draft as a Recommendation, with the addition of a 
>>> Scope section
>>> that makes the intended uses of polyglot clear.
>> 
>> I have filed https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20707 
>> about this.
>> 
> 
Received on Saturday, 19 January 2013 11:56:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:36 UTC