Tim Bray wrote:
PaceXhtmlNamespaceDiv
This is tough. There are some people who are really against this and who aren't moving. On the other hand, there are way more who are in favor. Reviewing the discussion, the contras are saying that this is sloppy and unnecessary and if it solves a problem, that problem really shouldn't be there, but they don't seem to be saying it's actively harmful. But the people in favor are arguing that this will reduce errors and improve interop. Also, the Pace was changed in midstream. Also, Paul thinks we will get feedback on this from out there in the IETF.
DISPOSITION: Borderline, but accepted.
I'm still not sure how it would improve interop, especially since the place the namespace can be defined is optional. I do not think those "Planet aggregators" would handle the following correct for example:
<atom:entry xmlns:atom="..." xmlns:b="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml";> <atom:content type="XHTML"> <b:div> Foo <b:br /> Et cetera. ...
Also, this restriction can be avoided by using |type="application/xml"| or |type="application/xhtml+xml"| I assume? (Although that is probably not valid for the TITLE or SUMMARY element (it should be).)
-- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/>
