- From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 15:21:07 +0000
- To: public-html@w3.org, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
On 18/01/2013 13:17, Henri Sivonen wrote: > Trivially easy but bad in terms of the Degrade Gracefully Design > Principle (which might not matter in this case in the Rapid Release > world). There are some theoretical bad cases one could imagine but no cases as bad as the spec being changed to break the existing documents using these entities including the document that _defined_ them. (The MathML2 spec) Which in its XHTML form is a well formed document and was parsed as such by any browser that could handle mathml at all until they changed to match the unfortunately drafted xhtml parse rules in HTML5 drafts. So current browsers reject the entire document as not well formed. That was a simple straight spec bug that broke existing content and it should have been fixed when reported. Since it wasn't fixed then it should be fixed now, better late than never. However putting that history to one side, do I read your message correctly that you wouldn't be totally against gecko implementing this if it were to be added to the html spec? (Even if you think it's not the most interesting or pressing topic that one could be discussing:-) David
Received on Friday, 18 January 2013 15:21:39 UTC