- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 07:59:13 +0100
- To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Cc: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, David Singer <singer@apple.com>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, Philip Taylor <pjt47@cam.ac.uk>, HTMLwg WG <public-html@w3.org>
Sam Ruby, Tue, 23 Mar 2010 22:34:46 -0400: > On 03/23/2010 10:08 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: >> To give a specific example, I would like to consistently avoid >> presentational markup on the webkit.org, but I do not want to add an >> xmlns declaration to every page. > > Two things: > > [chair hat off] > > (1) that goes into the territory that I previously referred to as > YAGNI, unless you also want to explicitly close all open elements and > consistently quote your attributes. My intent was only intended to > propose a "no motor cycle helmets" version and a "with motorcycle > helmets" version. The combinatorics get much more complicated > otherwise. > > [chair hat on] > > (2) I want to make it clear: you (personally) would be willing to add > some bytes to your pages, but you personally could not live with > those bytes starting out with the characters x m l n s, and you > personally find this, ... what? Offensive? May be Maciej's issue is that you suggest having a mode (the normal mode ?) which allows many things that Maciej would like to be warned about. While OTOH, if he adds the xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml", then the requirement becomes to use XHTML syntax, which would be stricter than Validator.nu's current modes and perhaps "too much". ;-) I personally do not find that I need to be warned about my use of <strike>, and would instead be very happy that I could validly use it without at the same time having to use a doctype that doesn't trigger standards mode. I would also like to be able to use NCRs without semicolons. ;-) I personally disagree with the definition of what is semantic or not in XHTML 1.0 strict. But not enough to not be able to accept that xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" signifies a best practise that is somewhat equivalent to a XHTML strict doctype (I suppose that is what Same has in mind). I also enjoy not closing <p> elements ... I have no clue what I would be using most - documents with xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" or without xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml". May be I would author some docs with the xmlns present, and just remove it when the doc was ready - so as to not trigger validator errors when online. But I feel that Sam's proposal fixes the most pressing problem in the current state of affairs. Namely the illogical choices we have to make: If we pick one doctype, then we can't use that element, or that attribute - at least not in that context .... OTOH, if you pick another doctype where you can, then you get quirks mode ... Etc. The xmlns string seems to trigger a much more logical choice. And, not the least: it is a choice! And it is unrelated to quirks mode. When it comes to HTML5, as it stands, then I find that it doesn't fix the problem of illogical choices: It creates warnings about @summary. And using the axis attribute is an error ... And so on. Which has made myself (and seemingly some others) look into how I can solve my problems via DOCTYPE editing instead [1]. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-validator/2010Mar/0027 -- leif halvard silli
Received on Wednesday, 24 March 2010 06:59:46 UTC