- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 11:14:38 -0500
- To: public-html-xml@w3.org
- Message-ID: <m2ipxd3qq9.fsf@nwalsh.com>
See http://www.w3.org/2010/html-xml/2011/01/25-minutes
[1]W3C
- DRAFT -
HTML/XML Task Force
Meeting 5, 25 Jan 2011
[2]Agenda
See also: [3]IRC log
Attendees
Present
Noah, Henri, Anne, Norm, Yves, MChampion, TimBL, John
Regrets
Chair
Norm
Scribe
Norm
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Accept this agenda?
2. [6]Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
3. [7]Next meeting 1 Feb 2011
4. [8]Review wiki use cases
5. [9]Any other business?
* [10]Summary of Action Items
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accept this agenda?
[11]http://www.w3.org/2010/html-xml/2011/01/25-agenda
Accepted.
Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
-> [12]http://www.w3.org/2010/html-xml/2011/01/18-minutes
Accepted.
Next meeting 1 Feb 2011
None heard.
Review wiki use cases
-> [13]http://esw.w3.org/HTML_XML_Use_Cases
Norm: First use cases is 01: [14]http://esw.w3.org/HTML_XML_Use_Case_01
Henri summarizes the use case.
Norm: Does anyone think that Henri has failed to capture the use case or
overlooked a solution that was discussed?
John: I think he underrates polyglot markup; it's true that polyglot
markup doesn't let you handle arbitrary HTML, but it does let you handle
non-arbitrary HTML.
Norm: Second use case is 02: [15]http://esw.w3.org/HTML_XML_Use_Case_02
MChampion summarizes the use case.
<Zakim> noah, you wanted to ask suggest a clarification
Noah: When I read the wiki, my first reaction was "do you mean someone has
content that they probably thought of as XHTML and they want to consume
that or do you mean something like a purchase order".
Mike: I think it was probably the PO
<hsivonen> the wiki page says "non-XHTML"
Noah: Right. I think that was the case and the page could be clarified.
... Sophisticated users may have some idea that handing arbitrary XML to
HTML5 will produce something that might be useful.
Mike: I think the vast majority of users don't have a clear sense of
what's in HTML
Noah: All I was suggesting that clarifying the page would be better.
Mike: Right. I can do that. I thought it was about arbitrary stuff with
angle brackets. Either they don't know or don't care about the tag set.
Mike; What were you thinking of Norm?
Norm: I was thinking of DocBook or Chemical Markup Language or a Purchase
Order. Nothing vaguely like XHTML.
<scribe> ACTION: Mike to update the wiki to clarify that point. [recorded
in [16]http://www.w3.org/2011/01/25-html-xml-minutes.html#action01]
<Zakim> Norm, you wanted to ask if Henri's solution to 01 is possibly
applicable here
Norm: I wondered if Henri's solution to use case 01 would be applicable.
If you had an XML parser that produced an event stream that could be read
by an HTML tool and produced (let's say no namespaces) elements named LINK
with content etc. Would that just work?
John: I think that sounds like use case 05
Norm: Is closing link elements and such only a parse time thing?
Henri: It's only parse time, but it depends on the interface to the tool.
... If the tool you have has a text or byte-oriented interface so that you
have to give it a text/html document, then you can't do it.
... The internals of an HTML5 tool would be like the internals of an XML
tool. In the browser for example, the DOM is namespace-aware.
... If you define the toolchain as stuff that happens after parsing and
you can give a DOM to it, then there's no problem
... But I disagree with the wiki page where it says there's no parsing
problem. It's not just about namespaces, there's also the void elements
and other elements that have specific processing associated with them. And
the empty element syntax in XML. There's much more to the parsing
algorithm than you might expect.
... If the use case is something like offline rendering, and you define
the conversion broadly enough, then it might work, but if you want to some
trivial serialization of the XML and then parse that, then there's more
problems than what the wiki page says.
Mike: What edit would you suggest?
... Or do you think the use case is pointless?
Henri: I'd go for the lower expectations solution unless you're willing to
make very broad conversions.
John: Are there HTML tools outside the browser that don't deal in HTML
syntax?
Henri: The validator.nu validator is I guess an HTML5 tool, but it's also
an XHTML5 tool.
John: We know some things do both.
Henri: So far, I don't think there are any HTML tools only that are only
HTML5 aware and not XHTML aware.
John: And I expect they'd all deal in syntax. Like an HTML editor that
reads syntax and writes syntax.
... What does it mean to have a tool that deals in a DOM?
Henri: I think Saxon is one such example.
Anne: There are HTML editors that take a DOM as well, like BlueGriffon (I
think)
<hsivonen> (BlueGriffon operates on a DOM, but I don't know if you can
give it one except by letting it parse HTML or XML)
Norm: Next use case is 03: [17]http://esw.w3.org/HTML_XML_Use_Case_03
Noah checks in his text and the TF reads for five minutes.
Henri: When it says that the HTML might be generated by a tool over which
the user has no control, in that case, you might also apply an HTML parser
to turn that content into XHTML and then you're back to the first bullet
point.
Noah: I think I agree, under solutions there's a third one: take the HTML,
parse it, reserialize as XHTML, and the process that.
Henri: At the point where you're generating the larger XML file, you can
serialize to XHTML.
Noah: I understand; I'll have to think about how to split that across the
problem statement and a solution.
Noah describes how he might edit the page to general agreement.
Norm: Anyone think the problem is mistated or that solutions we discussed
were overlooked.
Anne: This looks complete to me.
... I'm not sure this is a problem that needs any more solution than we
already have.
Norm: Any further discussion?
None heard.
Norm: The next use case is 04: [18]http://esw.w3.org/HTML_XML_Use_Case_04
John summarizes
John: Kurt put a bunch of stuff in the discussion section that I haven't
looked at yet.
<noah> I would find it helpful to have this wiki page using the separate
problem-statement/solution-statement style that the other pages use.
Norm: Thank you. As Noah suggests, would you be willing to rework the page
to have problem statement/solution as the other pages do?
John: I'll try; it's a busy week for me.
Norm: Does anyone think this fails to capture the problem or the solutions
that were discussed?
Noah: I'm having trouble grokking it in this form, but I'll work through
it.
Henri: I think that what John wrote captures the discussion pretty well;
what Kurt added goes into new areas that weren't discussed very much.
Norm: John, when you look at Kurt's discussion, will you please let us
know if find anything that's genuinely new?
John: Yes.
Noah: I was hoping for that level of exposition on the original page.
<hsivonen> Norm, you are aware of srcdoc, right?
<Norm> hsivonen, yes and I *hate* it with a firey passion.
<hsivonen> (My time is up. Gotta go. Regrets.)
<anne> bye hsivonen
Some discussion of the nature of markup. Structured attributes, order,
anonymity, etc.
Norm: Next is 05: [19]http://esw.w3.org/HTML_XML_Use_Case_05
Anne summarizes.
John; I believe it's true however that concatenation doesn't work with
100% reliability for HTML either.
Anne: True, it's 95% or so.
John: So you end up with something that's more complex than XML
conceptually becuase you have all of XML plus all the recovery strategy.
Anne: That makes the parser simpler...
John: I didn't say the parser, I mean it makes the language more
complicated.
Noah: Getting into XML5 under string concatenation seems a bit backwards.
... I think the use case is that you think you have WF XML, you want to
have WF XML, but sometimes you blow it. You want to serve XML5 because you
want error handling if you get it wrong. XML without draconian error
handling.
... For me, that's the use case for XML5. Let's gently move the world
towards better markup.
<anne> ("better" imo)
Noah: Half the time when you make a mistake, it's a mistake you want to
fix.
<anne> I am not sure where this is going? Is Noah volunteering for writing
up another use case?
Norm: I think that's a little different than 05, Noah, would you be
willing to write that up as an 07 use case?
Noah: Yes, of course. I don't think the overlap is a problem.
<scribe> ACTION: Noah to write up the use case for XML+error recover as
Use Case 07. [recorded in
[20]http://www.w3.org/2011/01/25-html-xml-minutes.html#action02]
John: Having spent the last week writing a MicroXML parser, I had to work
a lot harder than if I was going to be draconian. I had to always be in a
recoverable place.
Anne: I did it too and I didn't think it was that hard. It's actually
simpler because XML has a lot of places where you have to check the
character ranges and with recover you don't have to do that.
John: I was talking about much more complex recoveries; for example, when
you get a not well formed comment, what do you do?
Some discussion about how hard the recovery problem is.
Norm: Ok, next week we'll look at 06 and 07 and any others that have
changed significantly. Then I think we need to consider next steps. Are
there any?
Any other business?
None heard.
Adjourned.
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Mike to update the wiki to clarify that point. [recorded in
[21]http://www.w3.org/2011/01/25-html-xml-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Noah to write up the use case for XML+error recover as Use
Case 07. [recorded in
[22]http://www.w3.org/2011/01/25-html-xml-minutes.html#action02]
[End of minutes]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [23]scribe.perl version 1.135 ([24]CVS
log)
$Date: 2011/01/25 16:13:49 $
References
1. http://www.w3.org/
2. http://www.w3.org/2010/html-xml/2011/01/25-agenda
3. http://www.w3.org/2011/01/25-html-xml-irc
4. http://www.w3.org/2010/html-xml/2011/01/25-minutes#agenda
5. http://www.w3.org/2010/html-xml/2011/01/25-minutes#item01
6. http://www.w3.org/2010/html-xml/2011/01/25-minutes#item02
7. http://www.w3.org/2010/html-xml/2011/01/25-minutes#item03
8. http://www.w3.org/2010/html-xml/2011/01/25-minutes#item04
9. http://www.w3.org/2010/html-xml/2011/01/25-minutes#item05
10. http://www.w3.org/2010/html-xml/2011/01/25-minutes#ActionSummary
11. http://www.w3.org/2010/html-xml/2011/01/25-agenda
12. http://www.w3.org/2010/html-xml/2011/01/18-minutes
13. http://esw.w3.org/HTML_XML_Use_Cases
14. http://esw.w3.org/HTML_XML_Use_Case_01
15. http://esw.w3.org/HTML_XML_Use_Case_02
16. http://www.w3.org/2011/01/25-html-xml-minutes.html#action01
17. http://esw.w3.org/HTML_XML_Use_Case_03
18. http://esw.w3.org/HTML_XML_Use_Case_04
19. http://esw.w3.org/HTML_XML_Use_Case_05
20. http://www.w3.org/2011/01/25-html-xml-minutes.html#action02
21. http://www.w3.org/2011/01/25-html-xml-minutes.html#action01
22. http://www.w3.org/2011/01/25-html-xml-minutes.html#action02
23. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
24. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Tuesday, 25 January 2011 16:15:14 UTC