- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 10:13:25 +0300
- To: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com>
- Cc: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>, Ramanathan V Guha <guha@google.com>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, HTML Data Task Force WG <public-html-data-tf@w3.org>, RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 10:26 PM, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com> wrote: > I agree that it's a problem, and note that you can use XHTML with HTML5, so simple content-type detection isn't really enough. The distinction between XHTML and HTML processing depends solely on the Content-Type when bytes are being ingested, so you'd be doing it wrong if an XHTML vs. HTML check wasn't a Content-Type check. (For document trees, the distinction depends on the HTMLness flag on the document.) > Having different behavior for XHTML and HTML would lead to even more problems, I think the right way of dealing with XHTML and HTML is to define the processing on the document tree level and not checking the HTMLness flag (that reveals whether the document tree came form text/html or another source) at all. This is how the bulk of (X)HTML5 is defined. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Wednesday, 26 October 2011 07:14:02 UTC