- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 19:47:13 +0100
- To: public-html@w3.org
Henri Sivonen ong Fri, 2 Nov 2012 11:44:38 +0100: > Since the document should only document conclusions drawn from normative > statements made elsewhere, the Polyglot document itself should not be > normative, because there's a risk of erroneous conclusions getting held up > as normative and leading to confusion (especially since it's not a given > that change control on te Polyglot document is strictly enough controlled > to avoid errors and since there's a real risk of people asking for > restrictions stricter than the minimal logical consequences from normative > text elsewhere). Why does Polyglot Markup being based on XML and HTML lead to "a risk of erroneous conclusions getting held up as normative"? The XHTML serialization of HTML5 is also based on XML - is that a risk too? 1. Polyglot Markup describes a flavour of HTML5 that plays nice with XML pipelines, something you have asked for; [1] 2. Polyglot Markup is a continual myth busting experience; [2] 3. That Appendix C was non-normative did not prevent erroneous conclusions from being held up as normative. May be it was because non-normative that those errors weren't corrected? [1] http://twitter.com/hsivonen/status/263696331141431296 [2] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17710 -- leif halvard silli
Received on Sunday, 4 November 2012 18:47:41 UTC