- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 00:07:09 +0000 (UTC)
On Fri, 6 Aug 2004, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > > # To ease migration from HTML to XHTML, UAs conforming to this > # specification must place elements in HTML in the > # http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml namespace. > > How can HTML have a namespace? In the markup, it can't. But in CSS, it's pretty much assumed that all elements have a namspace, and in the DOM, there is a namespace attribute on nodes that can be given a value. The paragraph above (slightly clarified in more recent drafts) is just saying that as far as those mechanisms go, HTML should be assumed to have the XHTML namespace (which, as you point out, is pretty much what UAs do anyway, to some extent). > Maybe other things should be added as well. Example: UAs should render > |<br />| as |<br>| and not as |<br>\n>|. Sending the XML variant of Web Apps or Web Forms as text/html is invalid anyway, so we don't need to define that particularly IMHO. In fact frankly I'd rather we supported <foo//. > 2.2.6. The command element and commands > > Why is the content model of the COMMAND element empty? It would be a lot > better imo if it was designed like BUTTON. That would also mean that the LABEL > attribute can be left out. Why would it be better? The whole point is that <command/> would be used for the cases where you don't want anything to appear in legacy UAs. If you do want something to appear, well you can use <button>. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 23 August 2004 17:07:09 UTC