- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 20:59:47 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9887 --- Comment #17 from David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk> 2010-08-19 20:59:47 --- (In reply to comment #16) > Well I can't speak for MathML, but I do consider it my responsibility to > consider how HTML is going to be used, that's the only way I can make informed > decisions on how to write the spec! well yes, but some things are expressly extension points that when specifying the language you want to ensure can carry information or be used for future as yet un-thought of uses, but by default be ignored. data- attributes in html5 being a good example. annotation-xml is essentially exactly the same as data- attributes except that math(ml) terms being structurally more complicated typically require structured annotations hence the need for an element based attribution mechanism rather than simply using xml/html attributes. So in an ideal world (which may not be the world we live in) the default behaviour of the html parser would, at minimum, always parse correctly to the end of the annotation without messing up the rest of the expression, even if the annotation was put in the wrong namespace or even discarded it would be better than the behaviour shown in the attached example where annotating a subterm kills the entire expression. > > Would it be acceptable to have <annotation-xml encoding="text/html"> be the way > to escape back out to HTML? Actually we had a Math WG telecon this afternoon and discussed this as one of the possibilities. We weren't sure whether making the parsing of the content depend on an attribute value would fit into the the html parser's world view. I assume from your comment that this would be possible. This would certainly be a lot better than the current behaviour. Personally as I mention above I'd have hoped it were possible to ensure that the annotation could always be parsed to correctly find the end (assuming the content is well formed) however if that is too difficult (either for you to do, or for us to persuade you to do it) I suspect that using an attribute to switch the behaviour may in fact be acceptable, but at this point you'd better not take my word for it: I'll take this to the WG and report back. -- 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 Thursday, 19 August 2010 20:59:49 UTC