- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:52:00 -0500
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, public-html-request@w3.org
Received on Friday, 16 January 2009 01:19:27 UTC
Ian Hickson wrote on 01/15/2009 02:43:47 PM: > > On Thu, 15 Jan 2009, James Graham wrote: > > > > The requirement that UAs place all HTML elements in the HTML namespace > > does not make sense for all classes of UA. For html5lib I plan to make > > it optional whether HTML elements are assigned to the HTML namespace so > > that people using APIs that have a significant namespace tax do not have > > to pay that tax in the common case. > > This wouldn't be non-conforming, since you don't expose a (W3C) DOM. The > requirement is a black-box requirement that is only testable if the UA > also supports Selectors (with namespaces), XPath, W3C DOM scripting, or > such like. One of the possible backends of the existing html5lib parser *is* a W3C DOM. I previously made the suggestion that the ignoring of namespaces could be something individual "treebuilders" (in the html5lib sense) do, but James seemed unenthusiastic about that suggestion. > -- > Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL > http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. > Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' - Sam Ruby
Received on Friday, 16 January 2009 01:19:27 UTC