W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > July 2009

Re: xmlns in HTML5 (was: Telecon Agenda- Thursday 1500 UTC)

From: Steven Pemberton <Steven.Pemberton@cwi.nl>
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 12:26:53 +0200
To: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>, "Steven Pemberton" <Steven.Pemberton@cwi.nl>
Cc: "Toby Inkster" <tai@g5n.co.uk>, "Manu Sporny" <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.uw7ja3aosmjzpq@steven-750g>
On Fri, 17 Jul 2009 00:29:42 +0200, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:

> On Thu, 16 Jul 2009, Steven Pemberton wrote:
>> On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 10:50:52 +0200, Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk> wrote:
>> >
>> > For the same reason, xmlns:foo attributes aren't allowed in HTML4
>> > either.
>> Actually, to allow for future changes, the spec says:
>> "If a user agent encounters an attribute it does not recognize, it  
>> should
>> ignore the entire attribute specification (i.e., the attribute and its
>> value)."
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/appendix/notes.html#notes-invalid-docs
>> In other words, it should act as if it weren't there. So it is allowed,  
>> but no meaning is defined.
> So the following is valid HTML4?

Not valid, but permitted. I was going to say that you were confusing  
document and processor, but your comments below indicate you know the  

>    <html>
>     <head>
>      <title>Example</title>
>     </head>
>     <body marginheight="3">
>      <p lejhgaes="asflkahjsf">This is valid?</p>
>     </body>
>    </html>

> (I disagree with your interpretation of that text, by the way; it is a
> statement about user agents, not a statement about the conformance of  
> documents themselves. Requirements on user agents are not the same as
> requirements on documents.)

I agree entirely. In fact one of my main problems with the HTML5 spec is  
that it seems to conflate the two, but considering your statement above,  
the problem must just be that it entwines the two.

But the HTML4 spec defines a document type, and says the processor for  
that document type must accept certain deviations from that in order to  
allow for future change. In other words the spec anticipated that other  
document types would be sent in the future.

Best wishes,

Received on Friday, 17 July 2009 10:28:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:50:32 UTC