- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 11:50:50 +0200
- To: public-html-xml@w3.org
On Jan 7, 2011, at 19:38, Sam Ruby wrote: > it is doable, but it is a fair amount of work, and will break an unknown number of things, many of which we will only find out about after a release is made and it gets in the hand of real users. That looks a lot like the usual rationale for not changing something that someone perceives to be broken about browsers / the Web platform. :-) > Part of the appeal of the feedparser to date is that it is a single source file that has virtually no hard dependencies. This is something that would radically be changed by creating a hard dependency on html5lib. Sadly, it seems that "standard" libraries are always behind the times and if you want correct code, you need to import more fresh non-"standard" libraries. The dependencies then do become a problem. One solution is that libraries use more correct other libraries when they are available. That is, feedparser could use html5lib if available. (This can cause confusion, though. Everything has downsides.) > Over time undoubtedly the parsers will improve and html5 will become a part of the standard libraries for many programming langauges, but the fact remains that at the present time very little is available to people who write scripts that compares to xsltproc and libxml2. So we both agree that the problem is temporary but we disagree on how to react to the temporary state of affairs while it lasts? (My reaction is that things will get better soon enough, so it doesn't make sense to design elaborate interim solutions around the limitations of legacy tools on the content producer side.) -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Monday, 10 January 2011 09:51:23 UTC