W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > March 2009

Re: Element Whitelisting

From: Rob Sayre <rsayre@mozilla.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 04:06:28 -0400
Message-ID: <49C9E604.8090609@mozilla.com>
To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
CC: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, public-html@w3.org, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
On 3/25/09 3:30 AM, Doug Schepers wrote:
> It is notable, however, that in his most recent email on the subject 
> [1], Ian seemed disinclined to remove the whitelisted elements in any 
> future draft of the HTML5 spec, despite feedback from implementers 
> that having a normative list elsewhere seemed acceptable [2][3].

It doesn't matter where the inevitably incorrect and out of date list 
resides. It's a waste of time to continue discussing this editorial point.

> In particular, I was personally disappointed that the request to call 
> out unquoted attributes and case-folding as parse errors was not 
> incorporated; 

It's incorrect for the HTML spec to call them parse errors if they can 
be interoperably parsed by HTML parsers. It's not a good use of 
Mozilla's resources to spend time debating interoperable errors.

There is probably a role for a lint tool here, but that requires 
interaction with users more than standards group involvement.

> with all due respect to the people he cites in opposition to the idea, 
> this seems to have been made with no proof of technical problems, 
> implementation cost, or performance issues, and it raises considerable 
> risk to SVG as a format in existing User Agents, including authoring 
> tools.  I request that at least some real data be collected and 
> exhibited to support his position.

Very poor test suites are the main risk to SVG as a format, just as in 
2004[1]. Relatively speaking, the HTML serialization is a sideshow.

- Rob

[1] http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/roadmap/archives/005632.html
Received on Wednesday, 25 March 2009 08:07:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 March 2017 09:47:16 UTC