Re: Use cases

On 01/06/2011 04:18 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Thu, 06 Jan 2011 21:45:40 +0100, Sam Ruby <>
> wrote:
>> On 01/06/2011 02:27 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>>> Isn't one of the problems with RSS that you do not know whether it is
>>> HTML or XML? E.g. what "&amp;gt;" means? I am not sure how we can solve
>>> that here.
>> RSS 2.0 has many problems. Many of them outside the scope of this task
>> force. The existence of problems outside of the scope of this task
>> force doesn't make the problems that do affect the topics that this
>> task force is intended to address.
> So what is an example of an RSS document this task force could do
> something about?

I assert that from time to time one will come across a document fragment 
which has become disassociated from its media type.  I provided as an 
example of this: the rss 2.0 description element.  Henri asked if Atom 
solves this.  While it is correct that Atom provides a means to identify 
such content unambiguously, I further assert is that we can't assume 
that either RSS 2.0 is going away or that RSS 2.0 will be corrected in 
any reasonable period time.

>>>> As long as we have both application/xhtml+xml and text/html, we will
>>>> always have at least two ways to interpret documents. The two possible
>>>> strategies for mitigating this would be to either minimize or maximize
>>>> the set of documents which can be successfully parsed as either.
>>>> Given that HTML5 doesn't make a practice of rejecting any input, only
>>>> one of those two paths is viable.
>>> I would not mind changing XML.
>> I'm not sure why you are bringing this up in this context.
> I read your statement as XML being the limiting factor as it rejects way
> more input. So to maximize the set of documents which can be
> successfully parsed as either (i.e. no rejection happening) we would
> have to change XML.
>> Would you suggest changing XML in a way that reduces this down to one
>> path? In particular, how would the XML that you envision parse the
>> following fragment?
>> <rss version="2.0">
>> <channel>
>> <title>Scripting News</title>
>> <link></link>
>> I mention this as we recently discussed how HTML5 parses link tags:
> Per XML5 rules.

Changing XML in such a way would NOT reduce this down to one path.

For reference:

   $ python '<div 
xmlns=""><para>This is 
   | <div> (, div,
   |   xmlns="" (, xmlns,
   |   <para> (, para,
   |     "This is some"
   |     <link> (, link,
   |       "text"

The only way that adopting that would reduce this down to one path is if 
html5 were also changed in a way that would break the web.

- Sam Ruby

Received on Thursday, 6 January 2011 22:16:36 UTC