Re: Web Components Suggestion

On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Chaals McCathieNevile <w3b@chaals.com>wrote:

> On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 10:47:22 +0200, Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>  On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 3:12 AM, Michael[tm] Smith <mike@w3.org> wrote:
>>
>>  There is no conceivable conformance checker that's going to allow the
>>> use of completely arbitrary tag names. It doesn't matter what formalism
>>> it uses.
>>> To allow custom tag names and still be able to check the conformance of
>>> normal tag names, the only possibility is to limit the custom tag names
>>> to some recognized prefix -- e.g., x-fancyButton or whatever.
>>>
>>
>> <x:fancy-button>
>>
>
> Yes, XML has a way to make this work. But the people who don't get
> namespaces (a huge proportion of those publishing content or build the
> content content generation tools that were used in the last decade *on the
> public web*) have convinced us* that this is not an option for HTML.
>
> On the other hand, a log of programming languages manage to run a compiler
> that recognises arbitrary elements based on a grammar and an "import"
> declaration of some kind.
>
> In other words, they use a simplistic namespace mechanism (without the
> collision-control).
>
> *For some definition of us. For those who have worked happily with
> namespaces over the last decade, writing HTML5 as XHTML is a reasonable
> option, if the browsers don't scrap their XML capability.
>
I'm not a fan of XML or anything. But if you want to do namespacing it'd be
worth thinking about to do it properly before coming up with another
hodgepodge prefixing solution.