- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 17:42:21 +0100
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 17:37:52 +0100, Sam Ruby <rubys at intertwingly.net> wrote: >> The bug would request that Wordpress doesn't try to output XML for the >> text/html media type. That seems to be the problem here. > > If the code for Wordpress fit on a page, that suggestion would be easy > to implement. > > As it stands now, it appear that several hundred lines of code would > need to change. And in each case, the code would need to be aware of > the content type in effect. In some cases, that information may not be > available. In fact, that may not have been determined yet. Why would the code need to be aware of that? Atom supports type="html". > One way cross-cutting concerns such as this one are often handled is to > simple capture the output and post-process it. Latchlan opted to do so > with the WHATWG Blog. The first pass for things like this generally > takes the form of simple pattern matching and regular expressions. The solution used on the blog was a simple find (/>) and replace (>). > Often this evolves. What would be better is something that could take > that string and produce a DOM, from which a correct serialization can > take place. Shouldn't this be done throughout the code instead of at the end? > Now, what type of parser would you use? HTML5's rules come > tantalizingly close to handling this situation, except for a few cases > involving tags that are self-closing... Those cases are covered as well. You seem to think that "parse error" means the same as it does in XML or something. It does not. It merely means there's a syntax error and that you can continue parsing following the specified rules. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Wednesday, 29 November 2006 08:42:21 UTC