On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 14:53:50 +0100, Henri Sivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The obvious candidates for compound document mixing are SVG and
MathML. Also, there are indications that people will want to embed
RDF metadata in documents even though the syntax of RDF is designed
for external
On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 14:20:48 +0100, Charles McCathieNevile
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One of the sources of complexity in RDF syntax is the requirement that
it could be included in HTML documents in a way that didn't upset legacy
browsers. There are assorted use cases for being able to include
* Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 14:20:48 +0100, Charles McCathieNevile
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One of the sources of complexity in RDF syntax is the requirement that
it could be included in HTML documents in a way that didn't upset legacy
browsers. There are assorted use
On Feb 25, 2007, at 18:05, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
I think Henri was asking about XHTML5 documents.
Yes.
So legacy doesn't really matter there. If you put it inside head
it won't be displayed.
There is the legacy of XHTML browsers already shipped without XHTML5
support, which is why I
On 2/24/07, Henri Sivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The obvious candidates for compound document mixing are SVG and
MathML.
I agree that these are relevant, as is XBL.
Also, there are indications that people will want to embed
RDF metadata in documents even though the syntax of RDF is
On Feb 25, 2007, at 19:52, Robert Sayre wrote:
On 2/24/07, Henri Sivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The obvious candidates for compound document mixing are SVG and
MathML.
I agree that these are relevant, as is XBL.
But XBL isn't supposed to be embedded in an XHTML5 host document, is it?
The spec mentions the use of XHTML5 elements inside other XML-based
document formats. However, the use of foreign namespaces inside
XHTML5 is not covered.
The obvious candidates for compound document mixing are SVG and
MathML. Also, there are indications that people will want to embed
