Re: web/uri/iri/url [Fwd: Re: [whatwg] [wf2] type="url"]

On Mar 20, 2005, at 5:32 PM, Robert Sayre wrote: type="url" will get me lynched by standards purists. type="iri" will get me lynched by confused authors. type="uri" is a compromise. I hereby promise that should I ever again be tempted to raise an issue around the naming of web addresses, I shall s

web/uri/iri/url [Fwd: Re: [whatwg] [wf2] type="url"]

Original Message Subject: Re: [whatwg] [wf2] type="url" Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 01:28:41 + (UTC) From: Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Anne van Kesteren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CC: WHAT WG List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On Sun, 13 Feb 2005, Anne van Ke

Re: new issues in draft -06, was: Updated issues list

--On March 20, 2005 11:44:30 AM -0800 Tim Bray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Good point. My impression is that we do currently have SHOULD-level mandate > to > serve valid HTML; recognizing that most real-world implementors do make a > best-effort > with tag soup. Anyone who thinks that the

Re: Updated issues list

Julian Reschke wrote: -06: , examples updated Suggested examples for TEXT, HTML and XHTML: a title containing the string "Less: <", where the less sign displays emphasized when possible.. Including that character

Re: new issues in draft -06, was: Updated issues list

On Mar 20, 2005, at 10:58 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: Because I feel it's important. There will be many clients that won't include a tag-soup parser, and markup sent as "html" will thus be lost. So *if* a producer has a choice of using "html" or "xhtml", I think "xhtml" is preferrable, and the spe

Re: s/url/web/

My first tendency is towards "pick anything", but if there is to be discussion I'll happily throw in a couple of cents. Isn't the question: what is this thing we're naming? Using atom:uri/atom:iri is only marginally better than saying atom:string - it describes how the identifier is put togethe

Re: new issues in draft -06, was: Updated issues list

Robert Sayre wrote: Thanks for the close reading. Comments inline. Julian Reschke wrote: This has been mentioned before...: as far as I can tell, it's far easier for recipients to process "xhtml" compared to "html" (no tag-soup parser needed), thus *any* kind of change that encourages "xhtml" wo

Re: new issues in draft -06, was: Updated issues list

Thanks for the close reading. Comments inline. Julian Reschke wrote: This has been mentioned before...: as far as I can tell, it's far easier for recipients to process "xhtml" compared to "html" (no tag-soup parser needed), thus *any* kind of change that encourages "xhtml" would be appreciated.

Re: s/url/web/

Add me to the "uri" camp. Graham

Re: s/url/web/

* Robert Sayre wrote: >For "web": >Bray, Sayre, Duerst, Brickley > >For "iri": >de hÓra, Höhrmann > >For "uri": >Gregorio, van Kesteren "resource", "ref", "about", etc. work for me, but not any of those. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Weinh. Str. 22 · T

Re: s/url/web/

Robert Sayre wrote: Mark Nottingham wrote: > > +1 to the "just pick something and ship it" position > Indeed. Could it possibly matter less? We have more important things to talk about. For "web": Bray, Sayre, Duerst, Brickley For "iri": de hÓra, Höhrmann For "uri": Gregorio, van Kesteren Robe

new issues in draft -06, was: Updated issues list

..and here's a set of *new* issues I found while re-reading the draft...: 06-C01, 3.1.1 "type" Attribute This has been mentioned before...: as far as I can tell, it's far easier for recipients to process "xhtml" co

Re: s/url/web/

Mark Nottingham wrote: > > +1 to the "just pick something and ship it" position > Indeed. Could it possibly matter less? We have more important things to talk about. For "web": Bray, Sayre, Duerst, Brickley For "iri": de hÓra, Höhrmann For "uri": Gregorio, van Kesteren Robert Sayre

Re: Updated issues list

On 21/3/05 2:05 AM, "Julian Reschke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Here's a producedural question: if we have normative references to the > protocol and the feed discovery document, the spec won't get published > until those are done, too. +1 > Update -06: we still have a normative reference to

Updated issues list

Hi, I just reviewed my -05 issues list, and updated it based on the changes in -06: 05-C02, 3.1.1, "type" attribute -06: , examp

Re: s/url/web/

On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 19:38:55 -0500, Robert Sayre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Tim Bray wrote: > > > > EDITORIAL: > > > > There are a couple of places where we use "uri" in the markup, > > specifically the "atom:uri" element (3.2.2) and the "uri" attribute of > > "atom:generator" (4.2.5). > > >

Re: Person "identity"

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 15:25:24 +0100, Thomas Broyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well actually I was thinking about creating a "unified feed API" (in > .NET, but could be ported to other languages) and trying to reduce > memory footprint by reusing Person objects, as well as providing > relations (

Re: s/url/web/

On 18 Mar 2005, at 21:18, David Powell wrote: Friday, March 18, 2005, 7:08:32 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: -- wrong -- unknown to many users -- misleading to many users I suggest confronting users with something unknown is better than misleading them. How about something with less meaning