Eduard Pascual wrote:
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 3:56 PM, Anne van Kesteren <ann...@opera.com> wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 16:22:40 +0100, Shelley Powers
<shell...@burningbird.net> wrote:
My apologies for not responding sooner to this thread. You see, one of the
WhatWG working group members thought it would be fun to add a comment to my
Stop Justifying RDF and RDFa web post, which caused the page to break. I am
using XHTML at my site, because I want to incorporate inline SVG, in
addition to RDFa. An unfortunate consequence of XHTML is its less than
forgiving nature regarding playful pranks such as this.
I'm assuming the WhatWG member thought the act was clever. It was, indeed.
Three people emailed me to let me know the post was breaking while loading
the page in a browser, and I made sure to note that such breakage was
courtesy of a WhatWG member, who decided that perhaps I should just shut up,
here and at my site, about the Important Work people(?) here are doing.
Of course, the person only highlighted why it is so important that
something such as RDFa, and SVG, and MathML, get a home in HTML5. XHTML is
hard to support when you're allowing comments and external input. Typically
my filters will catch the accidental input of crappy markup, but not the
intentional. Not yet. I'm not an exerpt at markup, but I know more than the
average person. And the average person most likely doesn't have my
commitment, either.
http://annevankesteren.nl/2009/01/xml-sunday shows the commentor (who by the
way seems to be on your side in this debate) simply forgot to escape
<self-closed /> and then WordPress somehow messed up in an attempt to fix
it. I don't think anyone tries to make you "shut up".
Ouch! Thanks Anne for the screenshot, otherwise I wouldn't have known
that it was my comment the one causing the issue.
My apologies Shelley for that incident. I assure you that it was not
intentional: it was a quite long post, I used some markup with the
intention of making it more readable (like italizing the quotes), and
by the end I messed things up. Thanks to the preview page I noticed
some issues, like that I had to escape the "<sarcasm>...</sarcasm>"
for it to display (I'm too used to BBCode, which leaves unrecognized
markup "as is"), but I didn't catch the <self-closed /> one (nor the
preview page did: it showed up without issues).
Eduard, no worries. Your comment just demonstrated that a secondary
preview after editing is needed to self-catch these types of errors.
Sorry for the misunderstanding. That and Anne's image, and trying to
wade through the markup and figure out what was going on, because this
error should have been caught, put me in an irritated mood. Especially
since I have had people deliberately trip up my comments every time I
write about XHTML et al (ie the Philipe Anne mentions).
But no worries, and I shouldn't have made such a jump in assumption.
Shelley
