Sam Ruby wrote:
Hmm, besides being a clear violation of Postel's law,
You reference Postel's "Robustness Priciple" as if it were a law or
something. It certainly is a good idea for "safe" operations, like HTTP
GET. I'm entirely unconvinced of the wisdom of it being applied too
broadly for POST, PUT, or DELETE operations. The ramifications of
silent data loss may be entirely too great.
Case in point:
<title type="text">y=1x2+1</title>
is a whole lot different than the following perfectly valid title...
<title type="xhtml">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml";
xmlns:m="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML";><m:math><m:mrow><m:mi>y</m:mi>
<m:mo>=</m:mo><m:mfrac><m:mn>1</m:mn><m:msqrt><m:mrow><m:msup><m:mi>x</m:mi>
<m:mn>2</m:mn></m:msup><m:mo>+</m:mo><m:mn>1</m:mn></m:mrow></m:msqrt></m:mfrac>
</m:mrow></m:math></div></title>
If Snell's markup-less title implementation is robust, it would put such
an element into the introspection document, and would accept text, html,
and xhtml titles, but only if they don't actually contain markup.
Fair enough. if type="html" and it contains any markup, we'll reject as
unacceptable, otherwise we'll treat as text. likewise with xhtml. Give
me an element or attribute I can put in the introspection document to
declare what types I accept and I'll include it.
- James
