On Oct 19, 2007, at 20:30, Dan Connolly wrote:
On Fri, 2007-10-19 at 13:41 +0300, Henri Sivonen wrote:
It's not about not liking the current XML namespacing mechanism. It's
about the current XML one being unsupported in already shipped text/
html implementations. It follows that introducing it now to text/html
would create a scripting discrepancy between legacy and new browsers.
We don't want that, so we are stuck with no Namespaces in XML-style
namespaces in HTML.
Perhaps you don't want that... I don't think I want that either...
but when you say "we don't want that", would you please clarify
which "we"? Perhaps cite a source?
Wanting to minimize scripting differences between the HTML5 DOM and
the XHTML5 DOM is one design goal behind HTML5. I'm not sure if it
has been properly documented in the W3C space, but it is understood
tacitly at least among the #whatwg regulars. For example, HTML5 says
that the text/html parser should put elements in the http://
www.w3.org/1999/xhtml namespace. This requirement makes sense if
minimizing the scripting discrepancies between HTML5 and XHTML5 is
taken as a design goal.
Seeking to use the same browser engine code for both HTML and XHTML
1.x is a software development practice applied in Gecko, WebKit and
(presumably) Opera.
I'd point to issues that arise from scripting discrepancies (between
IE and others) and that were pointed out as unwanted on the Wednesday
telecon, but I now see that the minutes at http://www.w3.org/
2007/10/17-aria-minutes.html don't capture this quite obviously
enough to serve as a citation against scripting discrepancies. (I
think it follows naturally that if "we" don't want discrepancies
between IE and others today, we don't want similar discrepancies
between other sets of browsers tomorrow.)
(ARIA scripting in IE matters for using the ARIA states as styling
hooks and in case AT reads the DOM.)
I have seen substantial lack of consensus about
what we want with respect to compatibility and versioning.
Re: HTML version issue summary?
From: David Hyatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 17:16:58 -0700
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Apr/1408.html
At least the actual principles that have guided HTML5 spec
development so far include a principle that introducing new browser
engine modes is bad and the new spec should be written in such a way
that a browser that implements the new spec can use the code
complying with the new spec to process existing standards-mode Web
content.
The discussion of it in the context of design principles
doesn't seem to have converged, but perhaps I'm mis-reading
what you're saying? Perhaps you're appealing to something
covered in the compatibility section?
http://dev.w3.org/html5/html-design-principles/
Overview.html#compatibility
It appears that the scripting/DOM-level unification of HTML5 and
XHTML5 has not been properly documented as an explicit principle.
--
Henri Sivonen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
