W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > January 2013

Re: NU’s polyglot possibilities (Was: The non-polyglot elephant in the room)

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 15:20:31 -0500
Message-ID: <5102E90F.4010806@openlinksw.com>
To: www-tag@w3.org
On 1/24/13 4:57 AM, Michael[tm] Smith wrote:
> But really what would get you even farther if you're using XML tools to
> create your documents is to not try to check them as text/html at all but
> instead serve them with an XML mime type, in which case the validator will
> parse them as XML instead of text/html, and everything will work fine.

This remains the crux of the matter, at least to me. Why is what's 
outlined above illogical?
Most polyglot HTML is actually (X)HTML5 without DOCTYPE declarations.

The problem scenario I have goes like this:

1. Schema.org and related efforts inadvertently encourage polyglot 
documents that don't include DOCTYPE declarations

2. Publishers of these DOCTYPE deficient (X)HTML5 polyglots then *hope* 
that consumers (e.g. user agents) will go through the hell of making 
sense of this content packaged as Content-type "text/html" .



Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen

Received on Friday, 25 January 2013 20:20:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:51 UTC