> On 02 Apr 2016, at 16:21, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On 02 Apr 2016, at 16:13, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 02 Apr 2016, at 15:38, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi devs, >>> >>> One issue we have ATM is that the xhtml/1.0 parser requires valid XHTML but >>> the xhtml/1.0 renderer generates invalid XHTML (it generates fragments >>> only). This causes https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-13278 for example. >>> >>> I’m proposing to: >>> * Modify "xhtml/1.0" renderer to generate valid XHTML (i.e. xml declaration >>> + doctype + html element) >>> * Introduce a new "xhtmlfragment/1.0” renderer >>> * Have annotated versions of both for the WYSIWYG editor >>> >>> WDYT? >> >> Several points: >> * The change above could be rationalized as fixing a bug since it’s not >> normal that an XHTML/1.0 renderer would generate invalid XHTML >> * It’s potentially going to break some scripts. For example if you have in a >> custom vm: $services.rendering.render($panelUix.execute(), "xhtml/1.0”) >> >> Thus if we want to make sure that we don’t break backward compatibility we >> should instead: >> * Deprecate the “xhtml/1.0” renderer >> * Introduce 2 new renderers instead of one: “xhtmlfull/1.0” and >> “xhtmlfragment/1.0” >> * The problem is that this is not going to work nicely since it would mean >> we would also need to have parsers for those and the admins would need to >> decide which syntax to allow in his wiki amongst: xhtmlfull/1.0, xhtml/1.0, >> html/4.01, xhtmlfragment/1.0. That’s a lot to choose from… >> >> So we have 2 real choices I think: >> * Do as I suggested above but break backward compat in some places (we need >> to assess more precisely where it would break) >> * Or instead make the xhtml/1.0 parser support reading fragments. The >> advantage with this is that it won’t break backward compat. The cons is that >> it’s quite hard to implement since we have a stream/reader as input and >> there are plenty of ways to write xhtml. But we could decide that we only >> support the following use case: >> ** Read the first char and if it’s not ‘<‘ then add declaration + doctype + >> html >> ** If the first char is ‘<‘ then don’t add anything >> >> Right now I’m going to try implementing this. Let me know what you think. > > I’ve thought about another possibility. Implement a "xhtml/1.1” > parser/renderer instead. It could also comply with XHTML 1.1. > > We would “deprecate” the xhtml/1.0 syntax and favor using the 1.1 version. > > This seems the best to me, wdyt? We’ve already added an html/5.0 renderer > recently FTR.
To be clear this would mean: * Introduce "xhtml/1.1" parser and renderer * Introduce a “xhtmlfragment/1.1” renderer Another option is to do the same but with xhtml/5.0 (especially since we’ve introduced html/5.0 already). WDYT? Thanks -Vincent _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
