- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2007 12:59:13 -0300
- To: "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>
- Cc: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>, "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>, www-tag@w3.org
Dave Orchard writes:
> There are still things that could be usefully done with identifying
> the version of HTML regardless of the distributed extensions.
Yes, of course. In a typical HTML compound document page, HTML is indeed
one of the key vocabularies, and knowing it's version is truly useful. In
general, it's often true that the language of the root element in
tree-like tag-based documents is particularly interesting, but in some
cases the embedded languages are equally interesting, or even more
interesting. For example, if I have a container format:
<container xmlns="http://example.org/container">
<document>
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
</html>
</document>
<document>
<music xmlns="http://example.org/musiclanguage">
</music>
</document>
</container>
which is sort of a mythical XML equivalent of multipart mime, which of the
language versions matter? I think all 3 do, I.e. the versioning of the
html used in the first document, the versioning of the music language used
in the second, and the versioning of the container itself.
Noah
--------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
1-617-693-4036
--------------------------------------
Received on Tuesday, 3 April 2007 15:59:31 UTC