- From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
- Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 12:21:29 +0000
- To: public-html@w3.org
On 06/11/2012 10:52, Smylers wrote: > Would anybody else object to the description parts of the Polyglot > spec not being normative (so long as the definition is)? What I think it should be (which isn't quite what it is now, probably) is that the spec should be on REC track and should normatively define the name of the profile/subset and normatively define that subset, but that subset should be defined via _syntax_. Any statements that documents that obey that syntax produce the same DOM in text/html and application/xml parsing should not be normative as the effect of parsing a given document (and thus whether the two results are the same) is normatively defined elsewhere. This is not much different from say the MathML profile for CSS http://www.w3.org/TR/mathml-for-css/ which is a REC. That normatively defines a profile of MathML as documents that validate against a given dtd. The rationale for that subset is that documents keeping to it may be plausibly rendered just using CSS rather than a full MathML system, however there is not a normative requirement (in that document) that any particular CSS is used or works as intended. Defining "MathML for CSS" as "that bit of MathML that can be rendered by css", is a design aim but not a useful definition for authoring systems to target, they need a specific syntax profile. The same is true of polyglot. For systems that want to generate that form) without needing to say here whether it is a good or bad idea to do so) a normative syntax profile is what is required, not the motivation that compatible DOM are produced. David ________________________________________________________________________ The Numerical Algorithms Group Ltd is a company registered in England and Wales with company number 1249803. The registered office is: Wilkinson House, Jordan Hill Road, Oxford OX2 8DR, United Kingdom. This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The service is powered by MessageLabs. ________________________________________________________________________
Received on Tuesday, 6 November 2012 12:21:58 UTC