Re: handling fallback content for still images

On Jul 9, 2007, at 10:52, Robert Burns wrote:

> Yes, I understand. The point here was that Henri said that tr  
> cannot be a child of table in the text/html serialization. However,  
> it can.

No, it can only look like it to the author who doesn't know how HTML  
works on this point.

> Yes, I know its been like that. However, the XML anonymous tbody  
> element is a new approach that I think will help wither  
> interoperability tremendously. The question being posed if there's  
> anything the draft should say about things like that (or anything  
> else) for author or UA guidance on conversions between  
> serializations and DOM and treatment of especially XML de- 
> serialized DOMs.

Getting from a byte stream that is an XML document (labeled as such)  
into a DOM is out of the scope of HTML5. The reason to have an XML  
serialization in the first place is to let it work with vanilla XML  
tools, because if we don't spec that, people will do it ad hoc.  
Specifying non-vanilla processing would miss the point of having an  
XML serialization in the first place.

Henri Sivonen

Received on Monday, 9 July 2007 08:12:39 UTC