- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 10:45:51 -0500
- To: elharo@metalab.unc.edu
- CC: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>, public-html <public-html@w3.org>, www-tag@w3.org
Elliotte Harold wrote:
>> data:text/xml,%3C?xml-stylesheet%20href=%22data:text/css,*{font-weight:bold}%22?%3E%3Croot%3Etext%20%3Couter%3Eouter%20%3Cinner%3Einner%3C/outer%3E
>>
>
> Up to the application. Feed that URL to any app you like. The app
> defines what should be done with it. Feed it to a browser, you'll get
> one thing. Feed it to an app that wants to do somethint else, you'll get
> something else.
That's not acceptable from my point of view, basically.
> In this specific example, though, I personally don't recognize exactly
> what you're sending so I'm not sure which specs apply. (Some sort of
> encoded XML with CSS maybe?)
Here's the same thing without the URL-encoding:
<?xml-stylesheet href="data:text/css,*{font-weight:bold}"?>
<root>text <outer>outer <inner>inner</outer>
It's just a PI, then something that starts out looking like XML but has
a mismatched close tag. The XML specification doesn't preclude
construction of a DOM out of this text, and some XML consumers do just
that. Others treat the mismatched close tag as a fatal error and do not
produce a DOM. The inconsistency is a problem.
> There is no *required* processing, nor should there be.
That sounds like a fundamental disagreement, then. In the absence of
required processing you get what happened with HTML4.
-Boris
Received on Monday, 17 November 2008 15:46:57 UTC