- From: Aryeh Gregor <ayg@aryeh.name>
- Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 19:12:36 -0400
- To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Cc: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>, David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>, Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>, Karl Dubost <karl+w3c@la-grange.net>, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, Spec Prod <spec-prod@w3.org>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> wrote: > Can't see that this rules out 'application/xhtml+xml' - on the contrary. I'm not ruling anything out. All I'm saying is it should be fine for W3C specifications to be non-well-formed HTML5, served as text/html. If some editors or Working Groups want their specifications to be in other formats, that's fine too, as long as they're some type of standard(s-track) HTML and can be processed by a sufficiently broad range of user agents. If the SVG WG were to decide that they want to include inline SVG in examples in their spec and serve it as application/xhtml+xml or text/html depending on UA to get the broadest possible support, I think that's fine. But that doesn't mean anyone else needs to serve a well-formed spec to browsers. > CDATA is not permitted in polyglot markup. [*] '<' is also not > permitted. The '&' is also not permitted, so <script><</script> > naturally is unpermitted. Web browsers that support XHTML shows a fatal > error if included, so it is easy to discover. What this means is that you can't have any inline scripts or styles that include left angle brackets or ampersands. That's a pretty big restriction. You can often work around it, like by using JS or CSS escapes, but it's not something you can handle automatically.
Received on Sunday, 21 August 2011 23:13:38 UTC