CVS html5/html-xhtml-author-guide

Update of /sources/public/html5/html-xhtml-author-guide
In directory roscoe:/tmp/cvs-serv31755/html-xhtml-author-guide

Modified Files:
	html-xhtml-authoring-guide.html 
Log Message:
The final changes related to bug 19925 - some clarification added and typos fixed.

--- /sources/public/html5/html-xhtml-author-guide/html-xhtml-authoring-guide.html	2013/09/02 00:05:54	1.122
+++ /sources/public/html5/html-xhtml-author-guide/html-xhtml-authoring-guide.html	2013/09/02 00:15:40	1.123
@@ -125,20 +125,20 @@
     <p> For the most part, polyglot markup is just a pure deduction of the validity constraints and syntax requirements that
         HTML and XHTML dictate, many of which took polyglotness into considertaion when they were added to HTML5.
         However, for reasons of <a title="robustness">robustness</a>, the spec sometimes goes a little further than the principle of the lowest common
-        would have required.</p>
+        denominator would have required.</p>
 
     <p> For instance, included in the set of constrains on the serialization is the requirement to use the UTF-8 encoding.
         This requirement is not only because of the
         documented benefits (the HTML-specific ones are described in HTML5 [[!HTML5]]) of this encoding - which in turn has lead the HTML5 specification to recommend
-        that all new documents use UTF-8, but also because it is the sole encoding that <em>every</em> parser, be it a HTML parser or
-        and XML parser, is required to support. Also,  UTF-8 can also be the sole <em>HTML-valid</em> option, since it is one of
+        that all new documents use UTF-8, but also because it is the sole encoding that <em>every</em> parser, be it an HTML parser or
+        an XML parser, is required to support. Also,  UTF-8 might in some situatiosn be the sole <em>HTML-conforming</em> option, since it is one of
         only two encodings (the other being UTF-16, with its own, separate set of well-known issues) for which XML well-formed
         rules doesn’t require the encoding to be explicitly declared. This in turn has the benefit that the anyhow HTML-invalid XML
-        encoding declaration kan reliably be skipped without causing any side-effects. E.g. if one chose to use the <code>KOI8-r</code>,
-        encoding, then, as a side-effect, HTML-validity and XML well-formedness, the author would have to rely on a higher protocol
-        (such as MIME <code>Content-Type</code>) in order to support XML parsers. By requiring
+        encoding declaration kan reliably be skipped without causing any side-effects. E.g. if one opted to use the <code>KOI8-R</code>,
+        encoding, then, as a side-effect of HTML-conformance and XML well-formedness requirements, the author would have
+        been forced to rely on a higher protocol (such as MIME <code>Content-Type</code>) in order to support XML parsers. By requiring
         UTF-8, this side-effect is avoided. And so, while not the only theoretical possibility, the choice of
-        UTF-8 as the sole option, can be justified underlying principle of <a title="robustness">robustness</a>.</p>
+        UTF-8 as the sole option, is justified by the underlying principle of <a title="robustness">robustness</a>.</p>
 
     <p>Using <a title="robustness">robust</a> syntax can enable documents to be parsed more reliable in less capable parsers.
        But even if the document can be expected to be parsed and validated by fully HTML5 conforming tools,
@@ -152,7 +152,7 @@
     <p class="note">
        Polyglot markup is not defined as ”robust markup” because the XML-based polyglot markup
        syntax is not the only way to increase <a title="robustness">robustness</a>.
-       For instance, an HTML validator or an text editor could require all tags to be closed even if
+       For instance, an HTML validator or an authoring tool could require all tags to be closed even if
        this is not required by the HTML syntax.  But then again, polyglot markup, being valid
        XML, has some sometimes practical benefits which such a custom setup alone would not have.
     </p>

Received on Monday, 2 September 2013 00:15:41 UTC