- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 04:08:49 +0000 (UTC)
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Michel Fortin wrote: > Le 2007-06-14 ? 21:05, Ian Hickson a ?crit : > > > I've defined the parsing and conformance requirements in a way that > > matches IE. As a side-effect, this has made things like "naïve" > > actually conforming. I don't know if we want this. > > I'd make it non-conforming for the sake of readability. Done. On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Simon Pieters wrote: > > Firefox, Opera and Safari treat "naïve" as equivalent to > "na&iumlve". So for compat with them, the semicolon should be made > required. Agreed. On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, K?i?tof ?elechovski wrote: > > Aside: I know that it can be changed but "iuml" is a very unfortunate > name for "i tr?ma". How about deprecating "iuml" in favor of "itrema"? We're not deprecating anything, and just introducing a new name for i-uml would be a dangerous slippery slope to start down. Anyway, i-umlaut is fine, and easier to spell than i-diaeresis; why would you call "itrema"? Trema doesn't seem any more common than "umlaut"... On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Kornel Lesinski wrote: > > > > I've defined the parsing and conformance requirements in a way that > > matches IE. As a side-effect, this has made things like "naïve" > > actually conforming. I don't know if we want this. > > Rather not. This would break unencoded URLs: > > ?foo=bar®ion=baz ??? ?foo=bar??ion=baz On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > > You mean that Internet Explorer breaks them already? That doesn't make > much sense to me. On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Kornel Lesinski wrote: > > No, IE doesn't break them, and that's the point. > > Section 8.2.3.1. states "This definition is used when parsing entities > in text and in attributes." - if I understand this correctly, this makes > semicolon optional for entities in both attributes and text and > "®ion" in attribute would be interpreted as "??ion". > > If that's the case, it is not compatible with IE, because it parses > entities differently in attributes and text. Semicolon (or any > non-alphanumeric character actually) is required in attributes, but in > text it is not. > > In IE6 <a href="®ion">®ion</a> is equivalent to <a > href="&region">??ion</a> On Sat, 16 Jun 2007, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > > Awesome. Guess we have to reverse engineer that too then... On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Simon Pieters wrote: > > Entity parsing works the same in different attributes (tested <img alt> and <a > href>). > > Any character that is not in the range [a-zA-Z0-9] ends an entity -- i.e., the > following are equivalent: > > <img alt="Æ."> > <img alt="Æ."> > > ...and the following are equivalent: > > <img alt="Æ1"> > <img alt="&AElig1"> Fixed. Sigh. > This means that the semi-colon is not part of the entity name, and we > need to revert to the old entity table and instead have a third column > that says which entities always require a semi-colon. Actually no, some of the entities, even in an attribute, require a semicolon. Compare, for instance, these: <span title="&DaggerA"> <span title="°A"> <span title="&Dagger@"> <span title="°@"> <span title="‡"> <span title="°"> &DaggerA °A &Dagger@ °@ ‡ ° -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 21 June 2007 21:08:49 UTC