- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 23:20:13 +0000 (UTC)
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005, fantasai wrote: > Henri Sivonen wrote: > > > > I am very hostile towards the idea of requiring UAs to implement any > > XML parsing features that are in the realm of the XML 1.0 spec but > > that the XML 1.0 spec does not require. This means processing the DTD > > beyond checking the internal subset for well-formedness. > > That hostility may be justified as far as browser-type UAs go, but I > would rather you didn't apply it to server-side and authoring tools. I don't really understand why there would be a difference here. > > Those who want to use entities for input, should parse and reserialize > > as UTF-8 in their own lair and not expose their entity references (or > > parochial legacy encodings) to the public network. > > For those of us writing HTML by hand, this is not a practical solution, > particularly when invisible characters are involved. Invisible > characters aside, I don't want to go digging through a Unicode character > map every time I want → or τ. Most characters aren't in entities. > > Why bother with DTDs now that Relax NG exists? > > I agree that syntax-checking for XHTML5 documents should be implemented > with RelaxNG rather than DTDs. However, iirc, RelaxNG can't be used on > regular HTML. One could create a toolchain that converts HTML to XHTML > and then runs it through RelaxNG, but I wouldn't be surprised if the > converter needed a DTD for the SGML->XML conversion to work... Well, the way things are defined, you stick an HTML5 parser on the front, and get a DOM that is indistinguishable from an XHTML5 document's, and you pass that DOM to the RelaxNG engine (possibly reserialising it first). -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Friday, 24 February 2006 15:20:13 UTC