- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 09:59:53 -0400
- To: public-html-xml@w3.org
- Message-ID: <m2k48ukrvq.fsf@nwalsh.com>
John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org> writes: > Robin Berjon scripsit: > >> On Sep 26, 2011, at 17:19 , Anne van Kesteren wrote: > >> > I do not feel too strongly, and please publish if this is all >> > that is holding the document back, but I do think a comment >> > I made earlier still stands. The comparison between how HTML >> > instructs an agent to "recover from markup errors" whereas XML >> > is unforgiving is skewed. I think the reality is more that HTML >> > creates a tree out of any given input and XML defines a number >> > of conditions that will not result in a tree. I think this is >> > important because of the apparent perception that an HTML parser >> > is somehow vastly more complex than its XML counterpart. See e.g. >> > https://plus.google.com/103429767916333774260/posts/R6dPzhbc94R for >> > an example of that. >> >> Likewise, I do not wish to block publication, but I do support Anne's >> comment. I think that it can easily be addressed. > > I agree as well; adopting Anne's language seems appropriate to me. Done. >> In ยง2 of the conclusion, I don't recall this group reaching consensus >> that we thought a WG should be chartered to work on XML5 if the XML >> community is interested. I'm not at all against the idea, but I think >> that pointing in the direction of a WG overstates it. It might make >> more sense to start with a community group, or an IG. I don't feel >> overly strongly about this though. > > I strongly agree here. The HTML5 rules work because they reflect what > parsers actually do. We have no experience with parsing ill-formed > XML, and no way to say what the correct rules would be. Talk of a WG is > wildly premature. I would prefer something very vague about "further > investigation". Fair enough. I didn't really intend to imply the creation of a working group (despite my choice of words!) and I'll soften that language. (I was only trying to underscore the fact that *we* weren't the right group to do the job and so readers shouldn't be looking to us to produce such a document.) Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh Lead Engineer MarkLogic Corporation Phone: +1 413 624 6676 www.marklogic.com
Received on Tuesday, 27 September 2011 14:00:25 UTC