- From: scott lewis <sfl@scotfl.ca>
- Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 15:08:10 -0600
- To: Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com>
- Cc: HTML Working Group <public-html@w3.org>
On 4 Jul 2007, at 1853, Robert Burns wrote: > I had another thought about a a long-term solution (and basically > this is about long-term solutions) anyway.. Is it possible that, by > moving to an xml serialization, this problem will be solved? In > other words, can we just do <img src="myimage' >fallback</img> > whenever HTML5 content is served as XML. To me this should work (at > least as a complement to the other solutions). Forgive me if this point has already been covered -- I may have overlooked it in the discussion. HTML5 is a language with two serializations (I'll call them): HTML/ xml and HTML5/html. These are both representations of the same document. Both serializations of a document must parse identically, otherwise they aren't serializations of the same language. There is a simple test to ensure that: take a document in one serialization, parse it, generate the other serialization from it, then parse the other serialization and require the parsed documents are identical. With this method of <img> fallback, **the fallback content must be discarded** when the document is serialized as HTML5/html. Thus, my simple test would fail. Converting an HTML5 document from one serialization to the other is a perfectly legal operation. I feel strongly that it is a bad idea to require accessible content to be made less accessible in the course of perfectly legal processing. scott.
Received on Thursday, 5 July 2007 21:08:22 UTC