- From: Smylers <Smylers@stripey.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 12:30:11 +0100
- To: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Sam Ruby writes: > On 05/19/2010 05:47 AM, Smylers wrote: > > > Daniel Glazman writes: > > > > > Le 19/05/10 10:56, Henri Sivonen a écrit : > > > > > > > String that look like processing instructions (including<?php > > > > ... ?> ) are non-conforming in text/html and don't cause PI DOM > > > > nodes to be created in text/html. Thus, the polyglot guide would > > > > have wrong if it didn't say that PIs don't belong in the > > > > polyglot subset. > > > > > > > > As for<?php ... ?> being bogus in text/html in the first > > > > place, the HTML5 spec deals with what travels over the public > > > > network, so server-side pre-processor syntaxes are out of scope. > > > > Thus editing environments that want to preserve pre-processor > > > > syntax can't even follow the HTML5 spec proper when it comes to > > > > that syntax. > > > > > > Henri... Nobody's editing html with php inside through a http > > > pipe. It's local storage > > > > Quite. So that's out of jurisdiction of any HTML spec. > > Looking at the charter[1], I don't see how you came to that > conclusion. To clarify, I mean it's the processing of PHP which makes a PHP file out of HTML's jurisdiction, not that the file is local. Apologies for any ambiguity. If I have a stream of bytes, Y (maybe in a file, maybe not) which I'm either distributing to others and claiming it is HTML or which I'm processing with an HTML user-agent, then clearly Y comes under HTML's jurisdiction. But if I am automatically generating Y from a source file X (and the software processing X is not an HTML user-agent) then the format of X is purely my business; HTML simply doesn't care what the format of X is, and is in no position to declare it valid, invalid, poorly punctuated, boring, libellous, or anything else. X could be rot13-ed HTML, which clearly isn't valid HTML. But so long as my software correctly performs the rot13 translation in generating Y, everything that needs to be HTML is HTML. > [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/05/html/charter I'm pretty sure that isn't actually our charter ... Smylers
Received on Wednesday, 19 May 2010 11:30:39 UTC