Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-05 Thread Mike Schinkel
Elliotte Rusty Harold: >> For a long time we not so deliberately did limit the Web >> to people who were comfortable hand editing tags. Then >> blogs came along, and changed all that. (Wikis too.) >> There's an order of magnitude more people publishing >> now than there used to be a few years

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-04 Thread Elliotte Harold
Mike Schinkel wrote: Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote: People who hand edit can handle some simple well-formedness rules. I think that is wishful thinking, unless we deliberately want to limit the number of people who can contribute on the web. For a long time we not so deliberately did limit

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-04 Thread Mike Schinkel
Lachlan Hunt wrote: >> >>> (IE's disastrous XML Data Islands and Custom Tags provide sufficient >> >>> evidence of that.) >> > >> > Why are XML Data Islands disasterous? >> >> http://www.w3.org/mid/[EMAIL PROTECTED] In that email you wrote: "My point is that the whole idea of embeddin

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-04 Thread Mike Schinkel
>> 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/

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-03 Thread Mike Schinkel
Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote: >> People who hand edit can handle some simple >> well-formedness rules. I think that is wishful thinking, unless we deliberately want to limit the number of people who can contribute on the web. >> Almost every major CMS/Blog/Wiki uses a non >> angle bracket inpu

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-03 Thread Lachlan Hunt
Mike Schinkel wrote: Lachlan Hunt wrote: (IE's disastrous XML Data Islands and Custom Tags provide sufficient evidence of that.) Why are XML Data Islands disasterous? http://www.w3.org/mid/[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.au/

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-03 Thread Elliotte Harold
James Graham wrote: This is nonsense. flickr, blogger, wordpress and many other popular systems that allow user-provided content (as opposed to author provided) all use angle brackets. WordPress allows angle brackets. However I almost never use them. Instead I use its markdown format. Most

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-03 Thread James Graham
Elliotte Harold wrote: Even if people don't hand edit entire pages they will hand edit fragments of pages such as on wikis and forums and blogs and cms. Actually, no they don't. Almost every major CMS/Blog/Wiki uses a non angle bracket input format. This is nonsense. flickr, blogger, wordp

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-03 Thread Elliotte Harold
I hope you are not advocating that we shouldn't have considerations for hand-editing, and I don't see the need for hand editing ever changing. I hand edit a lot myself, though less than I used to. People who hand edit can handle some simple well-formedness rules. Even if people don't han

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Mike Schinkel
Lachlan Hunt wrote: >> (IE's disastrous XML Data Islands and Custom Tags >> provide sufficient evidence of that.) Why are XML Data Islands disasterous? I Googled for "XML Data Islands" and found nothing but articles praising it. I Googled for "disastrous XML Data Islands" and "XML Data Islands

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Mike Schinkel
Elliotte: I hope you are not advocating that we shouldn't have considerations for hand-editing, and I don't see the need for hand editing ever changing. Even if people don't hand edit entire pages they will hand edit fragments of pages such as on wikis and forums and blogs and cms. Also, if to

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Robert Sayre
On 12/2/06, Anne van Kesteren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What is the benefit of refusing to specify a serialization? I didn't refuse anything. I don't think that is a productive way to have a discussion, but the issue seems to be more controversial than I expected. Maybe we all need a litt

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 23:48:17 +0100, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I don't think we need to settle this issue in December 2006, but I do think there is ample evidence of interoperable but undocumented behavior that HTML5 implementors will need to consider. Does the WHATWG have a process f

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 23:41:34 +0100, Robert Sayre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: There's probably no way you can serialize that document. Hmm, Sam's example displayed correctly in Safari, Firefox, Opera, and recent WebKit nightlies. Yes. Rendering it is different from serializing it though. I agre

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Henri Sivonen
On Dec 3, 2006, at 00:48, Sam Ruby wrote: On 12/2/06, Robert Sayre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I don't think we need to settle this issue in December 2006, but I do think there is ample evidence of interoperable but undocumented behavior that HTML5 implementors will need to consider. Does the

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Sam Ruby
On 12/2/06, David Hyatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Shipping Safari has no SVG support. WebKit nightlies do. That's the only reason the logo now renders correctly in the nightlies so that particular file is completely irrelevant to this discussion. I'm confused. Which file? And why is i

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Sam Ruby
On 12/2/06, Robert Sayre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I don't think we need to settle this issue in December 2006, but I do think there is ample evidence of interoperable but undocumented behavior that HTML5 implementors will need to consider. Does the WHATWG have a process for capturing unresol

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread David Hyatt
Shipping Safari has no SVG support. WebKit nightlies do. That's the only reason the logo now renders correctly in the nightlies so that particular file is completely irrelevant to this discussion. dave On Dec 2, 2006, at 2:41 PM, Robert Sayre wrote: On 12/2/06, Anne van Kesteren <[E

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Robert Sayre
On 12/2/06, Anne van Kesteren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 22:55:00 +0100, Robert Sayre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 12/2/06, Anne van Kesteren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> There's probably no way you can serialize that document. > > Hmm, Sam's example displayed correctl

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 22:55:00 +0100, Robert Sayre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 12/2/06, Anne van Kesteren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: There's probably no way you can serialize that document. Hmm, Sam's example displayed correctly in Safari, Firefox, Opera, and recent WebKit nightlies. Yes.

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Robert Sayre
On 12/2/06, Robert Sayre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 12/2/06, Anne van Kesteren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There's probably no way you can serialize that document. Hmm, Sam's example displayed correctly in Safari, Firefox, Opera, and recent WebKit nightlies. That's wrong. Sam's example d

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Robert Sayre
On 12/2/06, Anne van Kesteren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: There's probably no way you can serialize that document. Hmm, Sam's example displayed correctly in Safari, Firefox, Opera, and recent WebKit nightlies. I don't think we need to settle this issue in December 2006, but I do think there is

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 21:10:49 +0100, Rimantas Liubertas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: P.S. That script, complete with indentation and readable variable names, is still an order of magnitude smaller than http://whatwg.org/images/logo <...> And so is this one: http://rimantas.com/bits/whatwg.pn

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Rimantas Liubertas
<...> P.S. That script, complete with indentation and readable variable names, is still an order of magnitude smaller than http://whatwg.org/images/logo <...> And so is this one: http://rimantas.com/bits/whatwg.png I get your point, but that image could use spome optimisation... Regards,

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 20:49:29 +0100, Anne van Kesteren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 20:45:06 +0100, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The question is: what would the HTML5 serialization be for the DOM which is internally produced by the script in the following HTML5 docum

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 20:45:06 +0100, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: SVG and MathML have a DOM. It wouldn't be that hard to serialize it as HTML5. Robert, if you will permit me, I would like to recast that into the form of a question, jeopardy style. The question is: what would the HT

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Sam Ruby
Robert Sayre wrote: SVG and MathML have a DOM. It wouldn't be that hard to serialize it as HTML5. Robert, if you will permit me, I would like to recast that into the form of a question, jeopardy style. The question is: what would the HTML5 serialization be for the DOM which is internally

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Robert Sayre
On 12/2/06, James Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: If we can only use technologies such as MathML and SVG in XHTML (as application/xhtml+xml of course), those technologies are dead in the water. I believe this is the main point of the thread. No one expects the WHATWG community to care about

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Elliotte Harold
James Graham wrote: I'm totally lost about your point. You seem to have changed from saying "producing valid XML is easy - any non-bozo can do it" to "well it's not easy but the tools will save us all". The allow me to summarize. There are two basic classes of web authors 1. Those who prefer

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Elliotte Harold
James Graham wrote: For example, the majority of people who are likely to want to publish mathematics on the web are professional scientists or engineers. However, in my experience, the fraction of such people who are competent to reliably produce valid XML is tiny[1]. [1] See, for example h

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread James Graham
Elliotte Harold wrote: I don't believe most web documents are hand authored any more. Consider that essentially every page generated by Blogger, Moveable Type or WordPress is not hand authored. Almost every page at sites like Amazon.com or walmart.com is not hand authored. Hand authoring is a

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Elliotte Harold
James Graham wrote: Well I think you're hugely mistaken. Any model without support for error recovery is not suitable for hand authoring (and only marginally suitable for machine authoring). You mean like almost every programming language ever invented? When's the last time you saw error re

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread James Graham
Elliotte Harold wrote: James Graham wrote: Ignoring the _syntax_ for a moment, there have been reasons given for wanting to use XML _features_ in HTML5 - the desire to embed MathML or SVG in a HTML document, for example. You suggest punting these use cases to XHTML5, without addressing the fu

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Elliotte Harold
James Graham wrote: Ignoring the _syntax_ for a moment, there have been reasons given for wanting to use XML _features_ in HTML5 - the desire to embed MathML or SVG in a HTML document, for example. You suggest punting these use cases to XHTML5, without addressing the fundamental problem that t

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Elliotte Harold
Henri Sivonen wrote: I think putting subtrees rooted at or in the SVG and MathML namespaces respectively (and allowing /> to close elements while the tokenizer is looking at such a subtree) would be more forward-compatible with future SVG and MathML revisions. (Subtrees rooted at children of

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
On Sat, 2006-12-02 at 10:13 +, James Graham wrote: > the fundamental problem that the XML parsing model is unsuitable for the web How so? (Or is "the web" here a metonymy for "Internet Explorer LTE 8"?) Or, to tackle this from an alternate angle, don't you think adopting an openly hostile at

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread James Graham
Lachlan Hunt wrote: The XHTML serialisation exists to make use of XML-only features, like xmlns syntax. People wishing to use such features *must* use XML. There has been no reason whatsoever given for wanting to try and use unsupported XML-only syntax in HTML, most likely because there is n

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-02 Thread Henri Sivonen
On Dec 2, 2006, at 09:19, Lachlan Hunt wrote: The best idea so far for how to make it work is for parsers to automatically recognise the tag names and put them into the correct namespace. I think putting subtrees rooted at or in the SVG and MathML namespaces respectively (and allowing /

Re: [whatwg] markup as authored in practice

2006-12-01 Thread Lachlan Hunt
Robert Sayre wrote: So, is it poisonous to allow Demonstration hmm http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"; style="float:right"> in HTML5? Yes, that's extremely harmful. XML syntax cannot and must not be used in HTML documents! 1. It gives the false impression that namespaces actually

[whatwg] markup as authored in practice (was: something about slashes)

2006-12-01 Thread Robert Sayre
On 11/30/06, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'd gladly put in a in my page, the question is: would > the WHATWG be willing to meet me half way and allow xmlns attributes in > a very select and carefully prescribed set of locations? This seems like a bad idea. If you have HTML, parse