- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 14:35:19 +0200
- To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Cc: "Michael[tm] Smith" <mike@w3.org>, public-html@w3.org
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> wrote: > Michael[tm] Smith, Mon, 5 Nov 2012 13:03:54 +0900: >> Leif Halvard Silli, 2012-11-04 19:47 +0100: >> >>> 1. Polyglot Markup describes a flavour of HTML5 that plays nice >>> with XML pipelines, something you have asked for; [1] >>> [1] http://twitter.com/hsivonen/status/263696331141431296 >> >> That tweet is not at all Henri saying he asked for "a flavor of HTML5 that >> plays nice with XML pipelines". >> >> What it says exactly is "Again heard the claim that HTML5 doesn't play nice >> with XML pipelines. Clearly, I need to advertise >> http://about.validator.nu/htmlparser/ more." > > OK. So let me guess. He reacted to a complaint that said that it was > bad that HTML5 "promotes" not XML well formed HTML. No, what was said at the relevant TPAC session wasn’t that specific. It was just a vague repetition of the myth that HTML5 “doesn’t play nice with XML pipelines”. > But he, still, this > way, recognized the need for playing nice with XML tools. Polyglot > Markup would be one method for "playing nice". Polyglot markup is a bad method. On the input side, it limits the range of input compared to just taking both an HTML parser and an XML parser off the shelf. On the output side, you can’t use a generic XML serializer, so it’s an illusion that polyglot would let you get away with no HTML-specific software at the output end of the pipeline. But we’ve covered the technical issues again and again. The purpose of the first message in this thread is to serve Process per Chair request—not to present any new information. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Monday, 5 November 2012 12:35:50 UTC