- From: Tantek Celik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
- Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 17:43:11 +0000
- To: "Henri Sivonen" <hsivonen@iki.fi>,public-html-request@w3.org,public-html@w3.org
- Cc: masinter@adobe.com
FWIW I have implemented an XML workflow on my own site[1] that works just fine with processing biglot HTML5 documents with <!DOCTYPE html> (which I use as a data store) and produces text/html "safe" biglot documents. So its certainly possible to do so. And frankly wasn't that hard (using PHP DOMDocument even). YMMV. Tantek [1] http://tantek.com -----Original Message----- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 01:32:09 To: <public-html@w3.org> Cc: <masinter@adobe.com> Subject: ISSUE-4: Basis of the appeal to "XML editing workflows" I just re-read http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jan/0015.html Point #4 talks about polyglot documents and point #10 talks about XML editing workflows. Is there verifiable existence proof of a pre-existing XML editing workflow that: 1) Would not work if <!DOCTYPE html> or <!DOCTYPE html SYSTEM "about:legacy-compat"> were used. AND 2) Already produces otherwise text/html-safe output (e.g. doesn't output <div/> or <br></br> and doesn't use namespace prefixes). AND 3) Would work with if the doctype <!DOCTYPE PUBLIC "-//W3C HTMLWG hixie//NONSGML HTML 20100401//EN" "about:legacy-compat"> were used. ? (Observation: Either way, this doesn't seem to have anything to do with *versioning*--just with the ability of claimed existing XML editing workflows to deal with particular syntax.) -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Wednesday, 10 March 2010 17:43:36 UTC