- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 11:49:43 -0700
- To: Philip Taylor <pjt47@cam.ac.uk>
- Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, Technical Architecture Group <tag@w3.org>
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Philip Taylor <pjt47@cam.ac.uk> wrote: > Jonas Sicking wrote: >> >> On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 1:52 PM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote: >>> >>> I took an action item from the TAG yesterday to convey the following >>> request: >>> >>> The W3C TAG requests there should be in TR space a document >>> which specifies how one can create a set of bits which can >>> be served EITHER as text/html OR as application/xhtml+xml, >>> which will work identically in a browser in both bases. >>> (As Sam does on his web site.) >>> >>> This request requires a lot of explanation. To start, it is recognized >>> up >>> front that this will be a subset of the set of possible documents that >>> can >>> be expressed as HTML5. This is entirely OK. For example, if it were to >>> be >>> the case that such a subset were to entirely disallow scripts of any >>> kind, >>> that would be acceptable as there exists a substantial class of documents >>> which do not require scripting of any kind. >> >> Out of curiosity, what does "work identically" encompass? Do they have >> to have the same DOM? Or just render the same when the default UA >> stylesheet is applied? Or just be semantically equivalent? >> [...] >> If DOMs aren't important, only rendering is, I assume that this >> document won't qualify: >> >> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> >> <head> >> <style> tbody { background: green } </style> >> <title>example document</title> >> </head> >> <body> >> Integer values for true/false. >> <table> >> <tr><td>true</td><td>1</td></tr> >> <tr><td>false</td><td>0</td></tr> >> </table> >> </body> >> </html> > > This one would also render differently: > > <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> > <head><title>example document</title></head> > <body> > <pre> > Arbitrary example text</pre> > </body> > </html> > > and this one will also cause data corruption depending on the content-type: > > <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> > <head><title>example document</title></head> > <body> > <form> > Edit your comment: > <textarea name="comment"> > Your previous text</textarea> > </form> > </body> > </html> > > (because the text/html parser strips a leading newline character in > pre/textarea/listing elements), which seem like more serious issues than the > <tbody>, since (unless I'm missing something) it's impossible to safely use > these elements in polyglot documents, unless you do > > <pre><!----> > text > </pre> > > which is a horrid hack and won't work for textarea anyway. So I think a true > polyglot subset would have to exclude the textarea element, which limits its > usefulness further. (Maybe the remaining subset is still large enough to be > worth specifying in detail.) Wouldn't also any textarea or pre that starts with anything but whitespace be ok? Textareas are many times empty anyway. / Jonas
Received on Thursday, 1 April 2010 18:50:36 UTC