- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 03 May 2007 09:22:14 +0200
- To: Philip Taylor <excors@gmail.com>
- CC: public-html@w3.org
Philip Taylor wrote: > ... > I'm not actually sure why HTML5 parses unknown elements and <span> in > that way, since it doesn't match IE6, though I assume there's a reason > somewhere... But in any case, other deprecated/removed elements like > <xmp> do have to be explicitly specified with special parsing rules and > not treated like unknown elements, otherwise some sites will be parsed > very wrongly. > > So the specification has to 'support' all these elements in the sense of > defining how they're processed by UAs (regardless of whether authors may > or must not use them), rather than falling back on the behaviour for > unrecognised elements, else it would be useless to anyone trying to > parse the web (especially those who aren't already browser vendors with > existing code that can handle these cases). > ... I do understand why a specification for HTML5 parsing needs to specify that. However, a spec for HTML5 authors shouldn't even mention these special case in parsing rules: all I need to know is what tags are allowed where, and whether I need (or am allowed) to close them. In particular, producers of HTML5 documents shouldn't need to read about how broken documents are processed; they are expected to produce correct ones, right? So: in favor of splitting the spec (language spec / parser spec). Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 3 May 2007 07:22:51 UTC