- From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 02:07:34 +1000
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- CC: Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Julian Reschke wrote: > Jirka Kosek wrote: >> in the section 1.4.1 (http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/#html-vs) there is: >> >> "Generally speaking, authors are discouraged from trying to use XML on >> the Web, because XML has much stricter syntax rules than the "HTML5" >> variant described above, and is relatively newer and therefore less >> mature." > > Out of context, this sounds really bad... As I understand it, one of the reasons for that statement is that XML's draconian error handling is not very user friendly, and that if a simple well-formedness error slipped through the cracks, then it would result in an error that most users would not understand. However, I somewhat agree that the spec should avoid taking sides in the HTML vs. XHTML debate. Maybe it would be wise to rephrase it as a caution to authors that choose to use XHTML on the web. Maybe something like this: Due to the strict syntax rules and error handling requirements of XML, authors choosing to use XHTML should use caution in doing so to ensure that well-formedness constraints are not violated to the detriment of end users. -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.au/
Received on Thursday, 2 August 2007 16:08:02 UTC