Martin Duerst wrote:
At 20:44 05/02/17, Bill de hãra wrote: > >Martin Duerst wrote: >> At 19:03 05/02/16, Bill de hçãra wrote:
>> >The point I'm seeing here is that creating markup using string concats is inherently fragile. No surpise there. Wrt namespaces, fragility is eliminated when you stop using defaults (but there are other considerations which keep string concat fragile). Use of div covers off the XHTML case.
>> Yes, use of div covers that case. But that doesn't mean that if
>> some people want to use div, everybody has to use div.
>
>It does (I've never said otherwise) - there is a div tax.
I'm okay with those paying div tax who think they need a div. I'm not okay with everybody paying div tax for no apparent general benefit.
I should qualify this tax idea.
1. About Rob's example from MT; the point is twofold a) that what the tool provides ootb, b) we can't expect everyone understand the issue as well as Rob or we do. Asking questions about how he has his blog setup is missing the point. The point is how we expect Atom to help the other 5 million users generate sound feeds.
2. As things stand there's tradeoff here between robustness and markup generation.
4. The general benefit implied by the pace is a reduced amount of garbage content.
3. As I've said before the answer to this issue is to stop Atom going out in a default namespace as they are actively harmful. That is the most cost-effective and general useful solution.
cheers Bill
