Re: Suggestions for improvement

On 12/01/2008, Howard Cary Morris <> wrote:
>  Currently I know of no way to include html source from another file or
> site. may I suggest either
> <copy src="filename or url" /> or
> <script src="filename or url" type=html />
> Additional reason for suggestion: Some feel that all pages of a site have
> the same look and feel, and top be able to copy html source would simplify
> the process of making all page headers the same.

Am I right in interpreting this as a suggestion for the incorporation into
HTML of something like PHP includes, but client-side? If so, might there not
already be reasonable ways to achieve this on the client side? If not, it's
a useful suggestion.

Minor augment against: may be able to do this with forms.
> Things to decide if implemented:
> What can copied sources include , <html>, <head>, <body>, <script>, etc.
> Have mixed feelings about above except <script> or <copy> which either
> should be disallowed or cause an error if a vicious circle occurs.

Presumably, the element specification would have to explain the allowed
elements of the code that is to be included, or would have to e.g. somehow
cascade over an included <head> element so that it is over-ridden by the
<head> element of the including document.

Slight improvement:
> <copy src="filename or url" &parm1=... &parm2=... /> so you can have
> substitutable parameters. Name of parameters are up to coder. When the
> copied code is expanded &parm1; gets replaced with the value of &parm1 (I
> know semicolon seems redundant, but consistent with values like &nbsp;).
> Could also allow multiple <default &parm1=... /> to set default values in
> copy member if that parameter was not specified. I think it should be an
> error if the default value for the same parameter is specified more than
> once and both default values are not the same. If the coder wants one
> default value in one part of the code and a second in another part of the
> code then two different parameters should be used. I suppose that constructs
> like <default &parm2=&parm1; /> should me allowed.

If this is to work, a syntax (e.g. some flavour of regexp) would have to be

Hope you consider this useful,
>     Howard Morris

It's an interesting suggestion, thank you!

N.B. In my defence in case I've missed something obvious: I'm new to this
list, and also fairly new to the draft HTML5 spec.


Received on Wednesday, 23 January 2008 04:16:26 UTC