Re: An HTML language specification

Hi Ian,

ext Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2008, John Kemp wrote:
>> Are you saying that if I were to parse an HTML 5 document and find the 
>> element
>>
>> <video src="">
>>   ...
>> </video>
>>
>> that the only possible meaningful representation of it is as an 
>> HTMLVideoElement?
> 
> That depends on your conformance class. If you're a scripting-aware 
> interactive user agent, then the only conforming representation of it is 
> as an HTMLVideoElement that then proceeds to generate network traffic and 
> attempt to render a video.
> 
> For other conformance classes, e.g. an authoring tool, a data mining tool, 
> a search engine, etc, the requirements differ.

OK, that sounds as if the processing requirements for each conformance 
class could be in one (or more) separate documents from the language 
syntax specification.

> 
> 
>> If not, shouldn't Mike's document be free of DOM-specific implementation 
>> requirements (which is not to say that they shouldn't exist - in order 
>> to properly define the HTMLMediaElement API)?
> 
> I don't have an opinion on what Mike's document should or shouldn't say on 
> the matter, I'm talking about what the HTML5 spec should say if it is to 
> separate semantic definitions and implementation requirements of elements 
> and content attributes from implementation requirements for DOM 
> interfaces, as it seems you suggested [1]. If that wasn't your intent, 
> then my apologies.

I was suggesting that the syntax of HTML could be (and appears to be) in 
Mike's document. And based on what you said above, that the processing 
requirements for that language could be in one or more other documents 
which interpret the language of HTML5 in one or more other ways 
(conformance classes).

Cheers,

- johnk

> 
> 
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Nov/0375.html
>

Received on Sunday, 23 November 2008 13:59:23 UTC