- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2008 14:16:13 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
On Tue, 30 Dec 2008, Julian Reschke wrote: > Ian Hickson wrote: > > On Tue, 30 Dec 2008, Julian Reschke wrote: > > > Does the spec specify how to parse or serialize a future element called > > > "foobar"? > > > > Yes. > > OK, where, specifically, is the serialization defined? It's not allowed. > > (The parsing algorithm might change in a future version, of course; > > that's the problem with a having a syntax that isn't self-descriptive, > > like XML, or forwards-compatible, like CSS. There's not much we can do > > about that.) > > If the parsing section changes, will it affect serialization? Meaning, > will it break existing producers? Yes. > > > > > That's a very verbose way to state "must ignore unknown values". > > > > > > > > It's a precise way of saying it, that leaves nothing ambiguous. > > > > That's the whole point. > > > > > > I think the same precision can be reached with less verbosity. > > > > Oh, well, I'm sure it can be said more tersely, sure. (Just out of > > interest, how would you phrase it?) > > I'd try to reduce repetition. I thought I had tried to reduce repetition. Could you show the text you would use? If it is better, I should use it in HTML5 for equivalent passages. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 30 December 2008 14:16:48 UTC