- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2007 16:59:00 +0300
- To: Sam Ruby <rubys@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
On Aug 4, 2007, at 14:52, Sam Ruby wrote: > Wow. What a loaded question. I'm still not sure if the proposal is about non-browser consuming software in private systems only or also about browser consumers on the public Web. > First, I don't see how fb:mobile is any more or any less "private" > than canvas. Canvas was private when it was only for Dashboard. Now that it works on the Web, it is no longer private. I think we are lucky that Apple didn't use a prefix or a separate namespace for canvas. Otherwise, we'd now be stuck with a prefix or a separate namespace for backwards compat. As far as I can tell, fb:mobile today is specific to communicating with the Facebook engine. It isn't about communicating to whatever app happens to issue an HTTP GET. That seems private to me. > Second, I don't even know where to begin with "cannot be trusted to > use XML". Those questions were not opposition to you proposal but attempts to elicit more information about what it is that it being proposed and why. I can guess that the premise behind the proposal may be that XML is too hard. (And I don't necessarily disagree.) But instead of making guesses and then continuing from my own guesses, I'm interested in what your premises behind the proposal are. > Let me pose a question. If Apple had decided that the canvas tag > could only be used inside of XHTML pages, what affect would that > have had on the adoption rate of that feature? Of course that would have had an adverse effect on adoption. I have a feeling that you see my questions as opposition that needs to be answered with a counter-question. I'm trying to find out what the premises of your proposal are. I still don't know what the premises are. >> So the tokenizer handling of CDATA syntax would change depending >> on whether the application layer knows about the kind of element >> that is the current node on the tree builder layer at the >> particular moment? > > "application layer"? No. One can determine such factors as "does > the name of the target parent element contain a colon" without > needing to reference the hosting application. Sorry about being thick, but I'm still not sure what changes you are suggesting to CDATA tokenization. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Saturday, 4 August 2007 13:59:17 UTC