- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 15:52:17 +0000
- To: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
Since I can't make the call tomorrow I thought I'd put a few thoughts below.
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Noah Mendelsohn <noah@arcanedomain.com> wrote:
> 4. Polyglot and DOM support of XML
Putting effort into this is unnecessary I think. The web will succeed
with or without XML and the web's architecture does not really depend
on it (and even less on weird hybrid syntaxes such as Polyglot).
> 5. Fragment identifier semantics:
I think this will largely depend on the application and its XML MIME
type story. E.g.
data:application/rdf+xml,<b xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
id="test">TEST<style>:target{background:lime}</style></b>#test
gives a green background in Firefox. Which seems reasonable if you
treat all XML MIME types identically. If you have a RDF browser and it
recognizes something is RDF, however that is defined, it having
application-specific semantics for the fragment identifier seems fine.
Just like some JavaScript applications do completely different things
with them.
I suppose there might be some relevance to web architecture here, at
least how it was originally conceived, but it seems fairly minor.
--
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2013 15:52:44 UTC