On Sun, 24 Sep 2006, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>
> Ian Hickson wrote:
> > We didn't check that <canvas> wouldn't cause clashes, either.
> 
> I see.  I had assumed that we in fact had.
> 
> > I don't see why. We don't want a flag for when people can use the storage
> > APIs. Or when they can use <img> elements. Or whatever.
> 
> True, because those are very unlikely to collide with random stuff the pages
> are doing (e.g. the storage APIs are using fairly long names that are unlikely
> to collide with page-defined functions and variables).
> 
> If we think MathML has a similarly low risk of collision, great.

I don't know about "we".

What I would be proposing for HTML5 is just the following list of 
elements:

   math, mrow, mfrac, msqrt, mroot, mstyle, merror, mpadded, mphantom,
   mfenced, menclose, msub, msup, msubsup, munder, mover, munderover,
   mmultiscripts, mtable, mlabeledtr, mtr, mtd, maction

...and of those only <math> came up at in the top 1000 elements in my 
search of elements on about one billion pages.

According to that same research, <math> is, on the Web, less frequent than 
the following elements: <m>, <e>, <rem>, <tab>, <yr>, <prohibits>, <your>, 
<lable>, <text-spez>, etc. It was present on less than 0.002% of the pages 
the research covered. (To give an idea of scale, <h8> is used on more than 
0.003%, so if we avoid <math> because of this, we should probably 
introduce <h7> and <h8> into HTML, since we're saying that's an important 
enough level to worry about.)

Now, of course, it could be that those 0.002% of pages are all hugely 
important and that we'll break the Web in adding this feature. We can't 
know until we've tried.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
_______________________________________________
dev-tech-layout mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-layout

Reply via email to