[Bug 12880] New: I think the boolean attributes are generally a bad idea in HTML5 given that the intended bare syntax can't be represented in the XML syntax, and that you're effectively encouraging people to break XML compatibility for no good reason. So I'm not happy to

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12880

           Summary: I think the boolean attributes are generally a bad
                    idea in HTML5 given that the intended bare syntax
                    can't be represented in the XML syntax, and that
                    you're effectively encouraging people to break XML
                    compatibility for no good reason.  So I'm not happy to
           Product: HTML WG
           Version: unspecified
          Platform: Other
               URL: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#top
        OS/Version: other
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: HTML Microdata (editor: Ian Hickson)
        AssignedTo: ian@hixie.ch
        ReportedBy: contributor@whatwg.org
         QAContact: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
                CC: mike@w3.org, public-html-wg-issue-tracking@w3.org,
                    public-html@w3.org


Specification: http://dev.w3.org/html5/md/
Section: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/complete.html#top

Comment:
I think the boolean attributes are generally a bad idea in HTML5 given that
the intended bare syntax can't be represented in the XML syntax, and that
you're effectively encouraging people to break XML compatibility for no good
reason. 

So I'm not happy to see the itemscope attribute in microdata. For sake of
argument, why not simply remove it entirely, and allow the itemtype attribute
to define the scope of an object? 

Posted from: 69.133.124.182
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686) AppleWebKit/534.24 (KHTML, like
Gecko) Chrome/11.0.696.71 Safari/534.24

-- 
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 Friday, 3 June 2011 13:13:43 UTC