- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 02:53:38 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7062
Summary: replace terms "CDATA element" and "RCDATA element"
with... something better
Product: HTML WG
Version: unspecified
Platform: PC
URL: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-
work/multipage/syntax.html#elements-0
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: HTML5 spec proposals
AssignedTo: dave.null@w3.org
ReportedBy: mike@w3.org
QAContact: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
CC: ian@hixie.ch, mike@w3.org, public-html@w3.org
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/syntax.html#elements-0
The current draft uses the terms "CDATA element" to describe <script> and
<style> elements, and "RCDATA element" to describe <title> and <textarea>
elements.
I think it would be good to consider replacing those with other terms.
The problem is that "CDATA" already has a number of meanings[1] that conflict
with one another.
[1]http://www.flightlab.com/~joe/sgml/cdata.html
So it seems less than ideal to introduce a new term that potentially adds even
more ambiguity and confusion around what "CDATA" means.
All that said, I can't at the moment think of any better terms with which to
replace CDATA and RCDATA and that would themselves be accurate and less
confusing.
But maybe other people have some some specific suggestions.
--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 29 June 2009 02:53:50 UTC