Re: [whatwg] We should not throw DOM Consistency and Infoset compatibility under the bus

Ian Hickson wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 11 Jan 2013, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>> Hixie wrote in https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18669#c31 :
>> > I think it's fine for this not to work in XML, or require XML changes, 
>> > or use an attribute like xml:component="" in XML. It's not going to be 
>> > used in XML much anyway in practice. I've already had browser vendors 
>> > ask me how they can just drop XML support; I don't think we can, at 
>> > least not currently, but that's the direction things are going in, not 
>> > the opposite.
>> 
>> This attitude bothers me. A lot.
>> 
>> I understand that supporting XML alongside HTML is mainly a burden for 
>> browser vendors and I understand that XML currently doesn't get much 
>> love from browser vendors.
> 
> Not just browser vendors. Authors rarely if ever use XML for HTML either. 
I know. XHTML, along with DOM Level 2, are my favorite features to mention
when talking about IE8 as a boat anchor, because both are more than 10 years
old now! The lack of DOM Level 2 support is probably why jQuery 2.0 no
longer supports IE8.

-- 
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/We-should-not-throw-DOM-Consistency-and-Infoset-compatibility-under-the-bus-tp34887132p34890189.html
Sent from the whatwg.org - whatwg mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Received on Friday, 11 January 2013 23:39:13 UTC