Long long long long post, which I haven't read fully yet. Just wanted to clarify few things you seem to have misunderstood.
On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 00:39, Keryx Web <webmas...@keryx.se> wrote: > Politics at the top. Useful criticism at the bottom... > > Hannes Magnusson skrev: >> I'm not saying that I'd veto patches to fix PhD rendering, but at the >> cost of massive performance degradation or hours of work... really? >> Should we really bother? > > Once again: "Massive performance degradation"? Not true. I'm not referencing browser rendering (although strict valid xhtml does in fact cause performance degradation). I'm talking about the extra billion function calls in PhD required to check "do we have open <p> tag? What about now? now?". Its not "massive" in the case of paragraphs maybe, but what about the rest of the dozens of possible elements and dozens of different code paths - each called over million times? Currently, one of the biggest overhead in PhD are the method calls. >> Lets rather spend some time on researching the various RDF >> vocabularies that we can implement using RDFa or eRDF, or even >> microformats, we would gain so much more on that. > > And having POSH markup as a foundation will very much *help* implementing > microformats and RDF! Right, but what does that have anything with strictly conformance markup to do? And FYI: w3c are actively working against POSH, all new specs are built on XHTML, not HTML. -Hannes
