- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 14:52:14 +0100
- To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Cc: public-html WG <public-html@w3.org>
Henri Sivonen, Fri, 9 Nov 2012 15:25:41 +0200: > http://www.w3.org/mid/CAJQvAufUBZ0aYhkPjeW4vhG9W7qUF8DymTLO8WX6gKzb5YoSfA@mail.gmail.com > > Exhibit A about confusion: “By doing this, your documents will almost > assuredly be better structured and of higher quality, yet still be > able to be treated as HTML5.” > (http://www.sitepoint.com/have-you-considered-polyglot-markup/) May be that sentence could be refined. But I wholeheartedly subscribe to the spirit of it. Feel free to explain why that is a sign of "confusion". > Exhibit B about confusion: > http://intertwingly.net/blog/2012/11/09/In-defence-of-Polyglot > conflates the problem of generating output that works with incompliant > HTML consumers with polyglotness. Well, there is some truth to the claim that HTML-compatible XHTML can overcome difficulties in incompliant HTML-consumers. > To keep truth in advertising, a profile that documents a set of > restrictions preferred by a group of polyglot enthusiasts should not > be labeled so that it looks like it's documenting the subset of HTML > that is also XHTML with the same semantics. For example, if you want > to define a profile that is successfully consumed by the HTML parser > of libxml2, I think you should design the profile by studying the > behaviors of the HTML parser in libxml2 and label the profile > something like “libxml2-compatible HTML profile” Is there a concrete reason to mention libxml2? If I could wish for things, then I think <meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html;charset=UTF-8"/> should be permitted in XHTML5, - and not only <meta charset="UTF-8"/>. That would increase the capability of legacy content producers to create more or less polyglot markup. May be I should file a bug? > instead of drawing > conclusions from the definitions of HTML and XHTML and labeling the > result “polyglot”. The result is polyglot. So one could ask why shouldn't one label it so? But of course we could bikeshed about another name. -- leif halvard silli
Received on Friday, 9 November 2012 13:52:49 UTC