- 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