of the
HTML5 proposal already includes support for PUT and DELETE.
Any thoughts on the URI Templates?
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
It never ceases to amaze how many people will proactively debate away
attempts to improve the web...
the main document, not about visual widgets.
BTW, I'd ALSO like a sandbox capability that completely disables script for
use within blog comment sections and forum posts etc.
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
It never ceases to amaze how many people
suggestions such as the one you
mentioned in this thread.
Cool. How do I get rights to post on the blog? And where exactly should I
link that type of proposal from here?
http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Feature_Proposals
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http
into the limitations imposed by
the specification writer. FWIW.
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
you to tell the
implementors to Go left.
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
[1] http://astore.amazon.com/mikeschinkels-20/detail/014028060X (p17-18)
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loren_Carpenter
to help
improve tag soup.
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
a
finding in support of your position. Until then, I don't think it's
appropriate to continue discussing on WHATWG. If others on the list
disagree and think we should continue the debate here, they should let us
both. Until then, adieu.
Respectfully,
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com
. And
specifically it would be helpful if you could point me to such guidance that
would indicate why this latest proposal is out of scope. Thanks in advance.
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec/
that that section is non-normative.
That said, I'd like to question if the scope is actually sufficient? If one
of the realities of the HTML5 spec is dealing with tag soup, I would think
that a scope that does not attempt to address that issue is A Bad Thing(tm).
--
-Mike Schinkel
http
Matthew Raymond wrote:
Mike Schinkel wrote:
Why should attributes (only?) specify the details of semantics that
elements already possess?
Global attributes aren't necessarily wrong if their
By global do you simply mean attributes for HTML elements, i.e. a type
attribute for a DIV element
that web developers would create valid markup. I just hope you guys can
envision that being something mentioned and marked as SHOULD in the spec.
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
elements added. I
can't afford to spin my wheels that much just to pontificate.
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
[1] I came to believe I had realized some aspects of software and
development several years ago, and I registered softwareentropy.com
Spartanicus wrote:
Mike Schinkel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Google, Yahoo and MSN aren't in the business of enforcing a
standards- compliance agenda.
Who is?
A better question to ask would be to whom does it matter?.
Is it really relevant to give your opinion of my grammer?
SE's have
Henri Sivonen wrote:
On Dec 21, 2006, at 15:06, Mike Schinkel wrote:
Henri Sivonen wrote:
Google, Yahoo and MSN aren't in the business of enforcing a
standards- compliance agenda.
Who is?
I may be missing something obvious, but I can't think of
anyone who'd by in the business
have the
semantics of all those elements to interact with, plus you
have interactions between an indefinite number of global
attributes that may be defined on that element.
Can you provide some concrete examples where that might cause a problem?
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com
priority.
Thanks Benjamin. That was exactly what I was thinking when I made this
unorthodox proposal.
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
is? And at the risk of sounding snarky, can you point me to a
reference where is it codified that they are not (at least partially) in the
business of standards?
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
P.S. Ian works for Google and he sure seems
that don't follow standards. So that leaves just
one question...
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
not to.
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
should be reserved for user-defined semantics.
Is this the same issue?
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
[1] http://tantek.com/presentations/20040928sdforumws/semantic-xhtml.html
[2]
http://listserver.dreamhost.com/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2005
to me in a public forum based on their *assumption*
that they know what *I* am thinking.
A more respectful approach would have been far more productive.
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
on the list regarding the above issue. If you want to debate the
merits and non-merits of adding semantics to HTML, or semantic styling
languages as you call it, I'll be more than happy to in a mutually
respectful context.
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http
for potentially creating a meme. ;-)
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
Edward O'Connor wrote:
If you read the list via gmane (nntp), each post has an 'Archived-At'
header which points at the post on the web.
Thanks. Can you suggest how I can configure that?
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
Martin Atkins wrote:
Mike Schinkel wrote:
But you are assuming there is a downside to them for
calling it foo-name
vs. just name. There isn't; developers use conventions all the
time. And if you read my proposal clearly, the prefix is
only needed
on a top-level element
to
spend 5 minutes each time trying to track down that URL!
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
Here is the proposal I made on the Microformat list just before this thread
started (I omitted my preceding commentary from that email):
What's needed is a single and officially recognized clearing house for
anything metadata tagged to HTML attributes. Since the WHATWG already
points to
problem that will otherwise occur.
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
P.S. Already RDFa vcard conflicts with Microformat vcard. Why not stop the
madness before it really starts?
, name, rel, rev, scope, size, src, type, and value.
I hadn't had the chance to ask the uf-discuss list about this, so now is a
perfect time. What about adding additional standard attributes to all
elements. Would it be helpful?
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http
to yours
then, as I am trying to simplify them to be memorable. I don't find most
URIs memorable (at least not the way a lot XML namespace URIs have been
designed.)
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
to work with, I encourage you to use them.
Then why not take just one more tiny step and encourage everyone to do so?
RDFa isn't going to conflict with anything in the real world.
Hehe. Now I can't argue with that one! ;)
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http
technical
issues. See my favorite book on the subject, New Rules for the New
Economy:
http://astore.amazon.com/mikeschinkels-20/detail/014028060X/103-3893332-2672
604
It's out of scope for the specification.
Ahem.
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
mechanisms are well-scoped so that
future extensions to the language itself aren't constrained,
as has happened in certain areas.
Are you not here contradicating your position with respect to my
disambiguation proposal? (and AFAIK you haven't suggested an alternative)
--
-Mike Schinkel
http
/microformats-discuss/2006-October/threa
d.html
--
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
clarified.
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
Sander Tekelenburg wrote:
I disagree. The standard should restrict itsef to
Well, it seems that the only one who have spoken on this issue disagree, so
I'm dropping the issue.
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
. :)
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
you wrote this, no one who has spoken up has voiced
any agreement with me on this issue, so I'm giving up this particular
crusade.
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
lifetime, that
everyone would soon buy themselves a jet engine for individual transportion.
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
P.S. BTW, I don't disbelieve in RDF and I don't want to work against it. But
as the IRAQ study group just announced, staying
the same ends.
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
1.0 places more educational demands
on the author (it's similar to the argument favoring HTML over XHTML.)
Simplicity really is the killer app.
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
could.
Anyway, it's always easy to say something won't work, especially if when no
alternate proposals are presented.
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
attributes to all HTML elements. Elias, do
you have any suggestions?
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
previously stated that most won't. You do
agree that's a worthy goal, right? You've said as much in numerous prior
posts. If so, how can something be put in the spec to get people to use a
conforming component?
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
they
should have used Pingback instead? It appears they were developed in
parallel?
BTW, why did you use XMLRPC with an simple RESTful POST would have sufficed
(and been easier to implement?)
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
and others rant
about
I don't rant about them. :-) I don't think I've actually said anything
about implementation strategies so far.
I meant guidance to implementors of web pages, i.e. HTML authors. You do
rant about them. :)
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http
references to implementations
in the spec, and the web hosts will use it.
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
in the spec, and
recommend that it (and ones for other platforms) be used by implementors?
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
enough to be hand editable.
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
as sucessful as text formats (there
are more text files than Excel files...)
Tools can always help in limited contexts, but we should still allow for
coherent ability to hand edit text. And I don't think this truth will
change in our lifetime.
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http
individual website and web app have to keep on top of
security holes, which most don't.
After writing this, it seems pretty clear that fragmented markdown is a
pretty big problem for web accessibility, and a divergent HTML/XHTML will
only make it worse.
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs
I suspect the others you mention are similar.
I don't ever remember using angle brackets
on Blogger, but it's been a while.
Point of note, Typepad has an Allow limited HTML option, no markdown.
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
XHTML_incompatible.
Not exactly. I was sold on having one direction, not two.
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
toward convergence when
technically possible.
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
to learn and
implement HTML and XHTML. That would mean avoid divergence whenever
possible. This could even mean planning to change XHTML at some point in
the future. Or it could mean having the W3C deprecate XHTML and withdrawn
it from recommended use.
Mike Schinkel wrote:
Striving
in HTML is nonsense and should have no
part in any transition from HTML to XML. I'll be
explaining this last point more in a future post.
Have you written that post yet, and if so may I have the reference?
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http
encode it using comments if
serialized to XHTML for round-tripping? Certainly it can't have any
hehavior in XHTML, but then when there are technical constraints (as opposed
to constraints on principle) limitations are acceptable because they can't
be helped.
-Mike Schinkel
http
Thanks for the link.
Serdar Kilic wrote:
Ian outlines why sending XHTML as HTML is harmful in his article at:
http://www.hixie.ch/advocacy/xhtml
Thanks for the link. Give me a chance to digest it. :)
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
format. They're a few CMSs
out there that use angle brackets, but they're a
distinct minority and losing market share.
I think you need to do some research on that, as I definitely disagree with
your assertion. Also, see my prior comments regarding markdown/
-Mike Schinkel
http
of this.
Not all use markdown, many allow HTML, especially blogs. And the more I've
thought about it, the more I think markdown might be a bad idea (future blog
post planned on that topic, once I've crystalized my full thoughts on the
matter.)
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs
Elliotte Harold wrote:
Mike Schinkel wrote:
Sounds like we need content-types determined by inspection
on web servers?(which would really slow-down serving pages,
unless they could be cached, but with so much dynamic
generated content that doesn't seem realistic...)
No, I don;t think
, and that if it is valid in XHTML then HTML5 should accept
it whenever technically possible.
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
? Why the active hostility to
well-formedness?
To make a conformance checker not accidentally let MIME type mistakes
silently pass in some cases.
Can you clarify that please, maybe with some examples. As is, I don't
understand the concern.
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs
generates HTML(4) with string
concatonation and XHTML with an XML pipeline
7.) Currently offering a CMS/web app generates XHTML with an XML pipeline
And, respectfully, it doesn't matter should not be considered a valid
answer.
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http
of significance?)
Those platforms collectively comprise a very significant component of the
web.
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
is almost never 100%) to write code that generates markup,
markup that is often flawed in unforeseen ways.
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
P.S. Jon Udell some great comments about the dangers of thinking tools will
solve that problem on his podcast
Internet?
I must be missing something...
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
Lachlan Hunt wrote:
Mike Schinkel wrote:
1.) I read the FAQ http://blog.whatwg.org/faq/ and it seemed to imply
that HTML 5 and XHTML where not at odds with each other? Did I
misread that, because from comments on this thread I get the
impression that might not be the case.
2
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Mike Schinkel wrote:
1.) I read the FAQ http://blog.whatwg.org/faq/ and it seemed to imply
that HTML 5 and XHTML where not at odds with each other? Did I misread
that, because from comments on this thread I get the impression that
might
string
concatonation. As such there is great value for users in having them be as
similar as possible. If they converge, it will accelerate chaos on the web.
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
and useful features. And I was very
happy with the decision. Now, after reading this thread, I'm thoroughly
depressed with respect to WordPress. FWIW. :-(
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
P.S. Hi Sam, you might recognize my name as the founder
71 matches
Mail list logo
