- From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
- Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 12:43:11 +0100
- To: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
- Cc: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, "ext Klotz, Leigh" <Leigh.Klotz@xerox.com>
On Mar 10, 2011, at 22:51 , Daniel Glazman wrote: > Le 10/03/11 16:46, Cameron McCormack a écrit : >> We should think of XBL as being a DOM-based thing, rather than an XML- >> based thing. Then we can have HTML syntax for the cases where >> everything is within a text/html document, and XML syntax for the cases >> like the ones I brought up, where you might be purely within an SVG >> document. > > I disagree. If you do that, the HTML serialization of a binding won't > be usable in a user agent having no knowledge of HTML. I would except that a binding document in HTML serialisation would use HTML in the shadow tree. If your UA doesn't understand that, it's unlikely to be able to do all that much with the binding in the first place (it could style it, but since bindings are mostly for behaviour I'm not sure how far that'd get you). -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
Received on Friday, 11 March 2011 11:43:39 UTC