- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 22:09:09 -0500
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- CC: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, HTMLwg <public-html@w3.org>
Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > > On Mar 11, 2010, at 6:13 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: > >> I can't help but wonder if one small change to HTML5 that would reduce >> this confusion, and yet would have zero inpact to browser vendors. >> This change would be to change the definition of the xmlns attribute >> on the html element from a talisman to a trigger of a few additional, >> yet simple, validation checks. To start with, it would trigger >> validation errors when elements are implicitly closed. Other checks >> could also be considered. >> >> A few notes: the intent is not to guarantee well-formedness, nor to >> change browser behavior, but merely to provide a means for someone who >> wishes to opt in to a more strict syntax to indicate their desire to >> do so. This also clearly would have no impact on those who advocate >> the use of a more minimal syntax. > > Seems like validators can do that without any changes to HTML5. I'm not certain I understand your point. The working group could certainly remove all requirements for conformance checkers and leave everything unspecified. I am suggesting that it would be useful to specify some additional conformance requirements. > Regards, > Maciej - Sam Ruby
Received on Friday, 12 March 2010 03:09:44 UTC