Okay, first thoughts: On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 11:54 PM, Aryeh Gregor <[email protected]<simetrical%[email protected]> > wrote:
> It's clear at this point that HTML 5 will be the next version of HTML. > It was obvious for a long time that XHTML was going nowhere, but now > it's official: the XHTML working group has been disbanded and work on > all non-HTML 5 variants of HTML has ceased. (Source: > <http://www.w3.org/2009/06/xhtml-faq.html>) That page clearly says that there will be an XHTML 5. XHTML is not going away. > * Delete '<meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" > />'. Which is a really stupid element anyway. :P > * Delete name attributes from all <a> elements. They've been > redundant to id for eternity, and every browser in the universe > supports id; we can finally move these to the headers themselves. > * Remove comments from inside <script> tags with a src attribute. I > already did this in r52828, since they're pointless anyway. Good ideas. * We can use HTML 5 form attributes. These will enhance the > experience of users of appropriate browsers, and do nothing for > others. At least Opera 9.6x already supports almost all HTML 5 form > attributes. (Source: > <http://www.opera.com/docs/specs/presto211/forms/>) We could, for > instance, give required fields the "required" attribute, which will > cause the browser to prevent the form submission and notify the user > if they aren't filled in, without needing either JavaScript or a > server-side check. What's to prevent a malicious user from manually posting an invalid submission? If there are no server-side checks, will the servers crash? > 2) Once this goes live, if no problems arise, try causing an XML > well-formedness error. For instance, remove the quote marks around > one attribute of an element that's included in every page. I suggest > this as a separate step because I suspect there are some bot operators > who are doing screen-scraping using XML libraries, so it would be a > good idea to assess how feasible it is at the present time to stop > being well-formed. In the long run, of course, those bot operators > should switch to using the API. If we receive enough complaints once > this goes live, we can revert it and continue to ship HTML 5 that's > also well-formed XML, for the time being. Why be cruel to our bot operators? XHTML is simpler and more consistent than tag soup HTML, and it's a lot easier to find a good XML parser than a good HTML parser. So, while I see some benefit to switching to HTML 5, I'd prefer to use XHTML 5 instead. -- Remember the dot http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Remember_the_dot _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
