On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 15:29:14 +0100, Robin Berjon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I would suggest to remove "(the XML declaration)" since xmlEncoding is
not the XML declaration, and turning it into e.g. "(as derived from the
XML declaration)" is unnecessarily long. The last sentence is not really
appropriate for XML documents, first the requirement is essentially im-
plied by the requirement that the result must be namespace well-formed,
and there are other cases where the XML declaration is required, e.g. if
the Document is an XML 1.1 document. I would suggest to remove this, or
turn it into a non-normative note clearly indicating that this is just
one of many requirements.
+1 to removing it.
This should be addressed.
I think there needs to be a node clearly stating that even if you try
to send a HTMLDocument, it will be serialized as if it were XML.
Agreed. Does the XHTML namespace get added automagically?
I rather wait with this until HTML5 is there. Although I suppose we could
add some non-normative text hinting in that direction.
It might also be worth to note that on sending, the implementation takes
a snapshot of the document and subsequent modifications of the Document
during async upload are not reflected in the result.
Yes, that will certainly alleviate some confusion from users who think
XML == DB.
This is also fixed.
The main flaw here however is that it may not be possible to meet the
requirement to create a ns well-formed document, for example, if it
contains a processing instruction whose data includes "?>"; it is not
possible to represent such a Document as an XML document. The draft has
to address this case.
I can't think of anything useful that the UA can do on its own there,
I'd suggest throwing an exception (DOMError or some such).
Has anyone tested what implementations do?
--
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
