- From: Uche Ogbuji <uche@ogbuji.net>
- Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 07:00:24 -0600
- To: public-microxml@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAPJCua3-g_W_nEmBYcZs_rG6dY02=kDLdBuDSJs7vMEGU=N4iQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 10:24 PM, Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org> wrote: > On Thu, 2012-09-06 at 11:08 +0700, James Clark wrote: > > > If PIs are not in the MicroXML data model, then that implies, in my view, > > that normal (non-markup sensitive) applications SHOULD NOT act on PIs. > But > > that is clearly not what we want. For example, we would want a browser to > > act on an xml-stylesheet PI. > > I don't really see this as any different from wanting a browser to act > on commented-out JavaScript or CSS, and > <style type="text/css"><!-- > .. . > --></style> > is actually fairly common practice and works (the CSS is intepreted). > I see a pretty big difference here. The CSS-in-comments example is a browser compatibility hack that was enshrined as kosher only post-facto. In this case we would be building in such a wart at the foundations, which is quite a hard idea to countenance. -- Uche Ogbuji http://uche.ogbuji.net Founding Partner, Zepheira http://zepheira.com http://wearekin.org http://www.thenervousbreakdown.com/author/uogbuji/ http://copia.ogbuji.net http://www.linkedin.com/in/ucheogbuji http://twitter.com/uogbuji
Received on Thursday, 6 September 2012 13:00:56 UTC