[Bug 6129] Extend HTML output method to support HTML5

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6129


Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |mike@saxonica.com




--- Comment #1 from Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>  2008-09-30 21:50:26 ---
Interestingly, the XSLT 1.0 specification seems to be much more accommodating
here than XSLT 2.0/Serialization 1.0. 

In XSLT 1.0 you can say <xsl:output method="html" version="5"/> and the spec
says pretty clearly what it's intended to mean, and leaves it to implementors
to make it work. Everying XSLT 1.0 says about serialization is a "should".

In Serialization 1.0 there are potentially conflicting requirements: if you use
the method="html" version=5" (and the implementation supports it) then the
output MUST conform to HTML5 but it also MUST meet lots of prescriptive rules
for the format of the output that may well conflict with HTML5.

So I think there's scope for an erratum to Serialization 1.0 to clarify that in
the case of future versions of XML, XHTML, or HTML not yet standardized,
anything in the spec for the target language overrides any requirements of the
serialization spec in the case of conflict.

But I think the real issue with the DOCTYPE declaration is not the XSLT 1.0
spec, it's the legacy XSLT 1.0 processors. The spec allows them to support
HTML5, but many of the implementations of XSLT 1.0 aren't going to change in a
hurry.

As for Serialization 1.1, it's difficult to build in support for HTML5 in its
current state. Perhaps one could go so far as a non-normative appendix to say
this is what HTML5 support might look like if the HTML5 spec doesn't change.
But that would be going well beyond what specs normally do.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.

Received on Tuesday, 30 September 2008 21:51:01 UTC