W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > February 2013

Re: Agenda for the TAG Teleconference of 14 February 2013

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 15:52:17 +0000
Message-ID: <CADnb78gartE1Mu5CKzWS1o4wce972_Abk273wvyHnik0eutFGg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
Since I can't make the call tomorrow I thought I'd put a few thoughts below.


On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Noah Mendelsohn <noah@arcanedomain.com> wrote:
>     4. Polyglot and DOM support of XML

Putting effort into this is unnecessary I think. The web will succeed
with or without XML and the web's architecture does not really depend
on it (and even less on weird hybrid syntaxes such as Polyglot).


>     5. Fragment identifier semantics:

I think this will largely depend on the application and its XML MIME
type story. E.g.

data:application/rdf+xml,<b xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
id="test">TEST<style>:target{background:lime}</style></b>#test

gives a green background in Firefox. Which seems reasonable if you
treat all XML MIME types identically. If you have a RDF browser and it
recognizes something is RDF, however that is defined, it having
application-specific semantics for the fragment identifier seems fine.
Just like some JavaScript applications do completely different things
with them.

I suppose there might be some relevance to web architecture here, at
least how it was originally conceived, but it seems fairly minor.


-- 
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2013 15:52:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 13 February 2013 15:52:45 GMT