Re: call 10 July? (Re: Comments on section 6.2 of ITS 2.0)

I will be on the call and would support the proposal to *not* introduce
CDATA.

Phil
Twitter: philinthecloud
Skype: philviathecloud


On 7 Jul 2013, at 08:59, "Felix Sasaki" <fsasaki@w3.org> wrote:

> Hi all, that is esp. people in the "to" field of this mail,
>
> could you join the MLW-LT call Wednesday 10 July, 2 p.m. CEST? Of course
> others are encouraged to join too.
>
> For whose who haven't followed this thread: Daniel Glazman, implementing
> ITS 2.0 in BlueGriffon
> http://www.bluegriffon.org/
> is arguing for requiring ITS 2.0 "rules" inside (X)HTML "script" to
> appear in CDATA sections or XML comments. Various people in this thread
> (including me) pushed back. The discussion very likely will continue on
> mail, but the call might help to resolve the issue. And we need to
> resolve it: otherwise we cannot finalize ITS 2.0.
>
> At Daniel, wrt to your question "for XHTML rules can appear everywhere,
> not just inside script?": this is due to the situation that most of the
> tools processing
> XHTML with ITS handle it just as one XML flavor. This has the benefit
> that you can write general ITS processors, not taking any specifics of a
> markup vocabulary into account.
>
> To support this approach, we have created a dedicated  ITS "rules" file
> already for ITS 1.0
>
http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-xml-i18n-bp-20080213/#relating-its-plus-xhtml

>
> The situation is now that the current approach (requiring ITS rules
> inside (X)HTML "script")) achieves backwards compatibility with ITS 1.0:
> an ITS 1.0 processor can convert e.g. XHTML using rules inside "script"
> to XLIFF and back. At the same time it allows for polyglot validation,
> as Jirka mentioned. If we now introduce CDATA or XML comments, the ITS
> 1.0 processors and rules files like
>
http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-xml-i18n-bp-20080213/#relating-its-plus-xhtml

> will be broken.
>
> So to me this sound like the choice between breaking exisiting tools and
> content (by introducing CDATA / XML comments), or putting a burden on
> HTML tool implementers (by keeping things as is). My high preference is
> the latter; I understand that performance will be an issue with inline
> global rules. But making web developers aware of this and strongly
> encourage them to use linked global rules can help.
>
> Best,
>
> Felix
>
> Am 05.07.13 17:58, schrieb Jirka Kosek:
> > On 5.7.2013 17:08, Daniel Glazman wrote:
> >
> >> If we implement what I recommend with a CDATA section for XHTML docs,
> >> getting the ITS rules from any script element is ALWAYS a matter of
two
> >> lines WHATEVER the flavor of HTML:
> > Whole point of recommending to use its-* attributes in XHTML is in
order
> > to get consistent results if you process page with either HTML or XML
> > parser as users use wrong media type usually. Of course this will no
> > longer be true with XML fragment inside <script> as it is not parsed in
> > HTML but it gets parsed with XML parser.
> >
> > If you will introduce CDATA sections inside <script> then you break
> > possibility of parsing content with HTML parser as HTML doesn't
> > recognize CDATA sections. So while solving one problem, you have
> > introduced another one -- resulting syntax is no more "polyglot
compatible".
> >
> > I really don't see elegant solution which will satisfy all constraints
> > here. We have to live with messy HTML parsing rules and sub-optimal
HTML
> > and XML compatibility.
> >
> > What about adding following into the spec:
> >
> > "If HTML or XHTML document contains script element with
> > type=application/its+xml and such element does not contain any child
> > elements then ITS markup must be extracted from this node by applying
> > XML parsing on a content of the script element."
> >
> > Would that resolve your objection? It will be pretty clear what to do,
> > and you can even use CDATA sections in XHTML if you think that makes
sense.
> >
> > Your code will then be just little more complex -- it will test for
> > presence of subelement -- if there will be some then all children of
> > <script> element will be treated as fragment of ITS otherwise you will
> > have first call parser on the text content of <script> node to get
> > fragment of ITS markup.
> >
> > 				Jirka
> >
>
>

************************************************************
VistaTEC Ltd. Registered in Ireland 268483. 
Registered Office, VistaTEC House, 700, South Circular Road, 
Kilmainham. Dublin 8. Ireland. 

The information contained in this message, including any accompanying 
documents, is confidential and is intended only for the addressee(s). 
The unauthorized use, disclosure, copying, or alteration of this 
message is strictly forbidden. If you have received this message in
error please notify the sender immediately.
************************************************************

Received on Sunday, 7 July 2013 17:43:38 UTC