W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > February 2006

[whatwg] HTML5 Parsing spec first draft ready

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 15:06:01 -0500
Message-ID: <20060216200601.GA12544@postdiluvian.org>
* Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> [2006-02-16 00:12+0000]
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, Dan Brickley wrote:
> >
> > * Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> [2006-02-15 23:02+0000]
> > > On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, Dan Brickley wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Have you considered defining the parser behaviour in terms of XML 
> > > > concepts?
> > > 
> > > What would that mean?
> > > 
> > > Could you give an example of what that would look like?
> > 
> > Expressing things in terms of DOM would be one way, assuming 
> > there is a mapping to XML infoset from the DOM
> 
> Well in that case, it's done. The HTML5 Parser spec is a mapping from a 
> Unicode character stream to a DOM.
> 
> 
> > > The output of the parser is a DOM, so the natural form to use as an 
> > > output concrete syntax is simply a serialised DOM (e.g. an XML file).
> > 
> > If your DOM comes with a standard XMLization, we're golden. Sorry I'm 
> > not so up to date on DOM stuff (eg. which DOMs have an XMLization 
> > defined, etc.).
> 
> A DOM is a DOM is a DOM. (Well, except for SVG's crazy-ass uDOM nonsense, 
> but let's ignore that.) There are admittedly various ways of serialising a 
> DOM: some are naive and more predictable, but can, in edge, cases end up 
> with ill-formed markup; some are clever and less predictable, but always 
> generate well-formed markup. Any test suite system would have to define 
> its serialisation policy.
> 
> 
> > > > GRDDL could then say "for HTML-ish bytestreams, feed them to the 
> > > > WHATWG algorithm to get XML, and feed that XML to normal GRDDL 
> > > > algorithm to get RDF"...
> > > 
> > > I'm with you up to the step where the output is XML, but I fail to see 
> > > how the next step is something WHATWG would be interested in. Could 
> > > you expand on this?
> > 
> > The next step is for people who find value in RDF's abstract graph 
> > structure but find the standard RDF/XML syntax unattractive. GRDDL lets 
> > folk deploy using XML or XHTML-based formats of their own devising, but 
> > map into RDF using XSLT so that RDF tools (eg. databases, SPARQL query 
> > engines) can consume and exploit the data.
> 
> Ah. Well, HTML5 is defined in terms of a DOM, so GRDDL is presumably, 
> therefore, already supported.

Once you pick a serialization (or we do, for GRDDL), I guess so. Is
there a shopping list of DOM serialization candidates around somewhere?

Dan

> 
> HTH,
> -- 
> Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
> http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
> Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 16 February 2006 12:06:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:26 UTC