- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 06:06:56 -0400
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- CC: Tony Ross <tross@microsoft.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Julian Reschke wrote: > Sam Ruby wrote: >> ... >> In this case (issue-41/action-97), the simpler questions are: >> >> 1) Can everybody live with the parsing rules that are specified in the >> current HTML5 draft? (If not, what needs to change?) >> ... > > I think it would be good to investigate whether HTML and XHTML parsing > rules can be aligned somewhat more. > > Right now the parser puts HTML elements already into the XHTML > namespace, and does similar things with MathML and SVG. > > Beyond that, the DOM it produces is inconsistent with what an XML parser > would produce for a similarly looking document. Can we do better? Here is a (work in progress) list of differences, many of which deal with differences other than a DOM: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/HTML_vs._XHTML > I realize that there is some broken HTML content out there which uses > xmlns:* attributes, but doesn't expect them to have an impact on the > DOM. The question here is: how many namespace URIs does this affect? > Could we just exclude the big offenders (Word HTML export?) from > processing? My recollection is that the biggest problem was xmlns="". As to Word export, the biggest problem is finding attributes with names that start with o:, but with no declaration for the namespace. > BR, Julian - Sam Ruby
Received on Friday, 23 October 2009 10:07:33 UTC