- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 23:48:00 +0100
- To: Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>
- Cc: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Sam Ruby (rubys@intertwingly.net) <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Jirka Kosek, Fri, 31 Jan 2014 22:19:34 +0100: > On 31.1.2014 8:09, Leif Halvard Silli wrote: >> The extension spec addresses the issue that the new doctype that was >> introduced by HTML5, removed (classic) XML ID-type assignment from HTML >> documents consumed as XML. As a result, XML tools relying on that kind >> of assignment are unable to locate resources of XML ID type in HTML5 >> documents. XHTML1 documents do not have this issue (as long at their >> DOCTYPE is included). > > It seems that your motivation is solely based on making it possible to > use xpointer in XInclude for HTML content. Then I think right approach > is to define that when XInclude is evaluated on text/html content, then > id attribute is considered of ID type and you are done. There is no need > to clutter HTML5 with xml:id attribute. Of course, it would be very handy if it was as simple to use HTML5 documents with XInclude as it is to use XHML1.x documents. And since the spec is about ”XML ID-type assignment“ for HTML5 documents (see the title), a future update could add the kind of mechanism that you suggest. But as of right now, I am unaware of tools that have taken that approach. It does not even seem to work for SVG (please correct me!) - and least not when it come XML tools. (And this despite the fact that SVG is a format for which the approach you recommend ha been talked about for a while.) Using HTML as format for all kinds of documents, is increasingly popular. Thus my attitude is that there is a need for a document that specifies what exists and works today. -- leif halvard silli
Received on Friday, 31 January 2014 22:48:30 UTC