Re: html5 syntax - why not use xml syntax?

On 7 Jul 2007, at 13:33, Robert Burns wrote:

> I hadn't followed the link when I replied earlier. That article is  
> one of those articles I was talking about, that contribute to the  
> confusion (xhtml syntax wants to kill you and everyone you care  
> about! hear the details at 11!). The mistake is thinking that HTML  
> is SGML the / solidus (/) can potentially serve as an element  
> terminus in SGML, if the DTD allows for it. However, HTML UAs do  
> not follow SGML strictly. If they did, the solidus termination  
> would still depend on the HTML DTD: including a potential HTML5  
> DTD, if we changed gears and went with an SGML serialization.  
> There's no reason our DTD couldn't ensure the solidus was not  
> treated as a element terminator if we went that route.

The question asked was whether it is currently possible to put XHTML  
syntax in a valid HTML document (to which the answer is no, as it'll  
be invalid due to NETs). Whether HTML5 uses SGML or not (if it does  
it has really lost relevancy with the real world) is irrelevant as to  
whether it is allowed under the current standards. There's nothing in  
the spec that preludes someone from creating an SGML serialisation of  
HTML 5, though…

- Geoffrey Sneddon

Received on Saturday, 7 July 2007 13:40:36 UTC