On Nov 5, 2006, at 16:29, Elliotte Harold wrote: > Lachlan Hunt wrote: > >>> Why not ditch the HTML 5 layer completely and simply allow the >>> XML tools direct access? >> Because we have to remain compatible with the web, where there are >> an infinite number of existing documents that browsers must be >> able to handle interoperably. > > You're getting this backwards. There's no reason for HTML 5 to be > compatible with existing *documents*, existing browsers and tools > sure; but other documents can be handled on their own. The HTML5 parsing algorithm is not about adding a third parser alongside old HTML and XML. It is about defining a parsing algorithm for text/html content in general--including content that purports to conform to older HTML specs. > Browser vendors can handle XHTML now. It's a non-issue for them. Having worked recently on improving XHTML handling in Gecko, I assure you that XHTML is not a non-issue from the browser point of view. >> * CMS, editor, and other tool vendors that have to accept HTML >> input from users. > > They mostly don't use HTML now. Instead they use things like > markdown. If they do accept HTML, they tidy it up in various ways > for security reasons, if not for well-formedness. Adding well- > formedness checking to those that don't is quite simple. It's a > question of will and desire, not ability. You are underestimating the bozo factor on ability and the effect of legacy code even when there is desire. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen at iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/Received on Sunday, 5 November 2006 11:47:39 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:49 UTC