Re: HTML 5 integration of SVG and MathML addresses ISSUE-33/mixedUIXMLNamespace-33?

I wrote:

>  Insofar as I 
> understand Liam Quin's proposal, it seems to offer at least an 
interesting 
> direction, in part because it offers a more decentralized way of 
> supporting new vocabularies, and evolving for eventual support in the 
core 
> specification.

Dan Connolly wrote:

> I'm not aware of anything in Liam's proposal that has to do with
> user interface; i.e. screen arbitration, event bubbling, etc.

Nor am I.  What I meant by "evolving for eventual support in the core 
specification" is that Liam's proposal, as I understand it, offers a 
reasonably clean migration path from early deployments in which users 
spell the image tag this way:

        <mosaic:img>

to a later state in which the HTML WG eventually decides that img should 
be added to the core specification, and therefore allows it to be spelled 
this way:

        <img>

Liam's proposal provides a way for making clear at runtime, and otherwise, 
that these are in fact referring to the same element name (specifically to 
the same expanded name).    I agree that it does nothing, before or after, 
regarding UI integration, event bubbling, etc.  Sorry for any confusion.

Noah

--------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn 
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
1-617-693-4036
--------------------------------------








Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
11/11/2009 04:07 PM
 
        To:     noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
        cc:     "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, Maciej Stachowiak 
<mjs@apple.com>, www-tag@w3.org, liam@w3.org
        Subject:        Re: HTML 5 integration of SVG and MathML addresses 
 ISSUE-33/mixedUIXMLNamespace-33?


On Wed, 2009-11-11 at 12:32 -0500, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com wrote:
> Dan Connolly wrote:
[...]
> > Have you looked at the integration of MathML and SVG into HTML 5?
> 
> If I understand the key design points in the current HTML draft, they 
> generalize as:  >>when using the text/html serialization, namespace 
> qualification in the DOM is provided only for particular vocabularies 
that 
> are baked into the (then current) version of the HTML Recommendation. 
Such 
> vocabularies will, in practice, be usable without prefix qualification; 
in 
> fact, even well known prefixes like <svg:circle> will not work. In HTML 
5, 
> the supported vocabularies will be MathML and SVG.<<

That's my understanding as well.

[...]
> The first of those points is "the big debate".  I did my best to outline 

> the pros and cons in my TPAC presentation [1].  I still am among those 
who 
> believe that it's worth trying very hard to do better.  Insofar as I 
> understand Liam Quin's proposal, it seems to offer at least an 
interesting 
> direction, in part because it offers a more decentralized way of 
> supporting new vocabularies, and evolving for eventual support in the 
core 
> specification.

I'm not aware of anything in Liam's proposal that has to do with
user interface; i.e. screen arbitration, event bubbling, etc.

I gather MS IE and Firefox each implement a binding of namespaces
to user interface components. I'm not very familiar with either
of them; I think the Firefox implementation is called XBL.

Some quick research shows
XBL 2 is at CR as of March 2007 http://www.w3.org/TR/xbl/ , waiting
for 2 implementations.

Wikipedia says "There used to be an XBL 1.0 specification document on
Mozilla.org, which was submitted to W3C as a Technical Note, but the
actual implementation never did match the specification."
 -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XBL


The Internet Explorer documentation seems to be:

Introduction to DHTML Behaviors
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms531079%28VS.85%29.aspx


I'm not sure if either of those mechanisms is powerful enough
to handle something like SVG or MathML.


> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2009Nov/0004.html

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E

Received on Thursday, 12 November 2009 02:55:18 UTC