- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 14:19:42 +0100
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006 12:51:36 +0100, Sam Ruby <rubys at intertwingly.net> wrote: >> It has to allow two authoring syntaxes. One HTML and one XML. I thought >> we were past that discussion? > > I fully expected my proposal to either be bounced immediately as sheer > lunacy, or for someone to quickly point to the specific reason why it had > been rejected before. I think it's still not clear to me what your proposal is and what it would entail. I thought you solely argued for allowing "/" at the end of the start tag of void elements, but it seems you don't want an XML serialization anymore as well or something in that direction. > The sense I am gathering is that the proposal is not obviously insane, > and in fact is a bit novel in that such a narrowly scoped adoption of > XML syntax -- i.e., only to the extent that it both reflects the web as > widely > practiced and only to the extent that doing such does not introduce > ambiguity into the grammar -- had not been considered before. I'm not sure I get this. > [...] -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Thursday, 30 November 2006 05:19:42 UTC