* Tim Bray wrote: >Currently, the draft says *nothing* about xml:space (unless I'm >mis-using the search function). If you read the specification for >xml:space (http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#sec-white-space), all it says >is that this is a message from the author to downstream software. So >there is nothing anywhere that says anything normative about xml:space.
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2004/xhtml-faq#xmlspace cites a quite different opinion on this matter... >Is the point here to tell them that if they want to control the >formatting, they should damn well use type="HTML" or "XHTML"? If so, >maybe we should spin the language around and say that: > > When type="TEXT", receiving software has a great deal of freedom in > how it chooses to display the content. Thus, publishers who want > to exercise formatting control should use the values "HTML" or > "XHTML" for the type attribute It would seem authors expect that <atom:foo type = 'TEXT' xml:space = 'preserve'>...</atom:foo> gets rendered as if it were <atom:foo type = 'XHTML' xml:space = 'preserve'> <xhtml:div><xhtml:pre>...</xhtml:pre></xhtml:div> </atom:foo> What's the point of allowing such random results? -- Bj�rn H�hrmann � mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] � http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Weinh. Str. 22 � Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 � http://www.bjoernsworld.de 68309 Mannheim � PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 � http://www.websitedev.de/
