W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > November 2012

Re: Rescinding the request to the HTML WG to develop a polyglot guide

From: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 12:56:31 -0500
Message-ID: <50B8F34F.2010001@arcanedomain.com>
To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
CC: "www-tag@w3.org List" <www-tag@w3.org>, Norm Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>

I want to acknowledge your request for TAG consideration that we rescind 
our request regarding polyglot. I intend to schedule this for preliminary 
discussion on our call this Thursday.

I do have a couple of questions: first, is your query being made formally 
on behalf of a working group? I assure you it will get serious 
consideration either way, but if "yes", then I may at some point want to 
coordinate with the chairs.

Also, are there any fixed time constraints for the HTML WG in getting a TAG 
response to this request? As you may be aware, we have an unusual number of 
seats up for election or re-appointment, and several that are open now. 
There is some chance (speaking for myself as chair, and not having 
consulted the rest of the TAG) that it would be of value to get involvement 
from whoever might be elected/appointed. Also, I am hoping that we will 
have a chance to bring in Norm Walsh to help us consider this, as he was 
the chair of the task force.

Thank you very much.


On 11/30/2012 11:16 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> In March 2010, the following request from the TAG was conveyed to the HTML WG:
>>      The W3C TAG requests there should be in TR space a document
>>      which specifies how one can create a set of bits which can
>>      be served EITHER as text/html OR as application/xhtml+xml,
>>      which will work identically in a browser in both bases.
>>      (As Sam does on his web site.)
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Mar/0703.html
> However, subsequently, the TAG requested the creation of an HTML–XML
> Task Force (of which I was a member) and the Task Force Report
> remarked “Another line of argument suggests that even under the most
> optimistic of projections, so tiny a fraction of the web will ever be
> written in Polyglot that there's no practical benefit to pursuing it
> as a general strategy for consuming documents from the web. If you
> want to consume HTML content, use an HTML parser that produces an
> XML-compatible DOM or event stream.”
> http://www.w3.org/TR/html-xml-tf-report/
> Considering that a Task Force created at the TAG’s request identified
> a non-polyglot-based approach of feeding HTML content into XML tooling
> and the alternative is more broadly applicable than polyglot, as it
> does not require the cooperation of the originator of the content,
> would the TAG, please, consider rescinding its earlier request to the
> HTML WG (quoted above) as having been obsoleted by later findings?
Received on Friday, 30 November 2012 17:57:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:33:17 UTC