://intertwingly.net/projects/pegurl/url-merge.html
See the readme for more information on webspecs:
https://github.com/webspecs/url#readme
- Sam Ruby
reason why I'm asking is that I'm working on rewriting the URL
parser per https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25946, and
would like to update the https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#host-parsing to be
consistent.
- Sam Ruby
On 11/21/2014 05:32 PM, Domenic Denicola wrote:
From: Sam Ruby [mailto:ru...@intertwingly.net]
I guess I didn't make the point clearly before. This is not a
waterfall process where somebody writes down a spec and expects
implementations to eventually catch up. That line of thi
On 11/19/2014 09:55 AM, Domenic Denicola wrote:
From: Sam Ruby [mailto:ru...@intertwingly.net]
These results compare user agents against each other. The testdata
is provided for reference.
Then why is testdata listed as a user agent?
It clearly is mislabled. Pull requests welcome
On 11/19/2014 09:32 AM, Domenic Denicola wrote:
From: Sam Ruby [mailto:ru...@intertwingly.net]
Done, sort-of: https://url.spec.whatwg.org/interop/browser-results/
Excellent, this is a great subset to have.
I am curious what it means when "testdata" is in the "user agents wi
without a test, and so on.
Thanks! I've tried to follow the example that the streams spec is
providing. Including the naming of directories.
From: whatwg [mailto:whatwg-boun...@lists.whatwg.org] On Behalf Of Sam Ruby
https://url.spec.whatwg.org/interop/urltest-results/
I'd be inter
he puck will be". In each
case of a known difference in published results, I've linked to
rationale for the change (generally to an indication that Anne agrees).
I hope this helps.
- Sam Ruby
ation has a list of known
differences from the published standard:
intertwingly.net/projects/pegurl/url.html
- Sam Ruby
ter is sufficent for non-IE browsers. I had to add the former
to get IE working.
But, as you undoubtedly have noted, unknown base schemes seem to cause
IE too ignore the base URL entirely.
- Sam Ruby
d the implementation to match the spec.
Spoiler alert: the results returned now don't match either of the values
you mention above.
- Sam Ruby
On Nov 4, 2014, at 14:32 , Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 3:28 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
To help foster discussion, I've made an alternate
On 11/04/2014 09:32 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 3:28 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
To help foster discussion, I've made an alternate version of the live URL
parser page, one that enables setting of the base URL:
http://intertwingly.net/projects/pegurl/liveview2.html#f
.html#foobar://test/x
Of course, if there are any bugs in the proposed reference
implementation, I'm interested in that too.
- Sam Ruby
On 11/02/2014 02:32 PM, Graham Klyne wrote:
On 01/11/2014 00:01, Sam Ruby wrote:
3) Explicitly state that canonical URLs (i.e., the output of the URL
parse step)
not only round trip but also are valid URIs. If there are any RFC
3986 errata
and/or willful violations necessary to make that a
did indeed mean errata to 3986.
- Sam Ruby
Barry, IETF Applications AD
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 8:01 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
bcc: WebApps, IETF, TAG in the hopes that replies go to a single place.
- - -
I took the opportunity this week to meet with a number of parties interested
in the topic of URL
On 11/1/14 7:56 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
On 11/1/14 5:29 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
It doesn't say that. (We should perhaps try to find some way to make
"{scheme}://" syntax work for schemes that are not problematic (e.g.
j
On 11/1/14 5:29 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 1:01 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
Meanwhile, The IETF is actively working on a update:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-appsawg-uri-scheme-reg-04
They are meeting F2F in a little over a week. URIs in general, and this
proposal
thing along these lines I describe above were
done, the IETF would be open to the idea of errata to RFC3987 and
updating specs to reference URLs.
- Sam Ruby
[1] http://intertwingly.net/projects/pegurl/url.html
[2] https://www.ietf.org/meeting/91/index.html
[3] https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#relative-scheme
On 10/30/14 2:09 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 11:24 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
http://intertwingly.net/projects/pegurl/urltest-results/d674c14cbe
I'll note that galimatias doesn't produce a parse error in this case (and,
in fact, the state machine specified by the c
On 10/29/14 4:47 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
1) Is the following expected to produce a parse error:
http://intertwingly.net/projects/pegurl/urltest-results/4b60e32190 ?
My reading of https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#relative-path-state is that
On 10/29/14 4:47 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
2) Is the following expected to product a parse error:
http://intertwingly.net/projects/pegurl/urltest-results/bc6ea8bdf8 ?
What is the DNS violation supposed to mean?
I would expect this to
fined here:
https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#host-state
And the following only defines fatal errors (e.g. step 5);
https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#concept-host-parser
My proposed reference implementation does indicate a parse error with
these inputs, but this could easily be removed.
- Sam Ruby
ng at is
https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/tree/master/url, and in
particular, the name of:
https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/blob/master/url/a-element.html
- - -
I think that a working and up-to-date live url parser would be a handy
thing to have, and I hope to have one available shortly.
- Sam Ruby
On 10/14/2014 05:49 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
At the present time, all I can say is that the https://url.spec.whatwg.org/,
https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/blob/master/url/, and
https://github.com/annevk/url are inconsistent.
I
On 10/14/2014 04:57 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:37 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
Given all of the above, would you suggest changing the spec or the expected
test results?
You said "The expected results are an object that returns the original
href, but empty values fo
On 10/14/2014 03:41 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 1:05 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
1) rows where the notes merely say "href" are cases where parse errors are
thrown and failure is returned. The expected results are an object that
returns the original href, but empty
stories/2014/10/13/url_rb.html
Note the comments linking back to spec sections, and comments that
identify step numbers.
- Sam Ruby
P.S. I didn't update to the latest test data yet; but from what I can
see the changes wouldn't materially affect the results, so I am
publi
On 10/12/2014 04:18 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 7:24 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
On 10/10/2014 08:19 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
2) https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#concept-basic-url-parser
I'm interpreting "terminate this algorithm" and "return failure" to
On 10/10/2014 08:19 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
I've now completed step 1, as described at [1].
Here are my questions/comments:
1) https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#url-code-points
U+D8000 to U+DFFFD are invalid as they are within the UTF-16
surrogate range
Disregard this comment, it turn
lative-path-state
If input contains a path but no query or fragment, the last part of
the path will be accumulated into buffer, but that buffer will never
be added to the path
- Sam Ruby
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2014Oct/0053.html
On 10/06/2014 12:59 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
On 10/06/2014 12:42 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 3:13 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
http://intertwingly.net/stories/2014/10/05/urltest-results/24f081633d
This does not match what
On 10/06/2014 12:42 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 3:13 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
http://intertwingly.net/stories/2014/10/05/urltest-results/24f081633d
This does not match what I find in browsers. (I did not look through
the list exhaustively, see below, but since this was the
er background on my methodology and results:
http://intertwingly.net/blog/2014/10/02/WHATWG-URL-vs-IETF-URI
- Sam Ruby
[1]
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/master/url/urltestdata.txt
AC meeting which goes from
the 15th of May to the 17th of May.
Thanks!
- Sam Ruby
ou can see examples of how surveys are evaluated:
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/#events
- Sam Ruby
> -Sebastian
>
> http://sebastianheath.com
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/
[2] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/#join
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 4:35 AM, Danny Ayers wrote:
>> IS
accidental.
>> ...
>
> I believe some time ago a certain Google employee actually *did* state that
> some of the conformance problems were unintentional. (yes, I did spend a few
> minutes finding that statement but wasn't successful).
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Mar/0555.html
> Best regards, Julian
>
> (*) Implementing error recovery, which IMHO isn't required.
- Sam Ruby
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 7:02 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jun 2010, Sam Ruby wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 3:01 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
>> >
>> > While I agree that it is helpful for us to cooperate, I should point out
>> > that the WHATWG was never
prefer that such a discussion happen on a publicly archived
mailing list.
- Sam Ruby
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
> Yet, when you made the change, you did it in a way that made the
> WHATWG version not a proper superset.
On closer reading, it turns out that I was incorrect here. It still,
however, remains a divergence, it still is mis-characteriz
occurring in the future?
What's the best way to address the mischaracterization of the
difference as it is currently described in the WHATWG draft?
Most importantly, how can we deescalate tensions rather that
continuing in this manner?
- Sam Ruby
at that time.
And, yes, I am intentionally cross-posting this request.
Shelley
- Sam Ruby
John Foliot wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
Really? This appears to be exactly the single, special status
privilege
currently reserved for Ian Hickson.
False.
...and yes, I stand corrected. Although the *impression* that this is the
current status remains fairly pervasive; however I will endeavor
sion to publish as a Working Draft. You are welcome to do
likewise[2].
JF
- Sam Ruby
[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#first-wd
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Jul/0627.html
Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
The lesson I would learn from open source is that finding people willing
to do useful work is much more important than tools or project
organization. While good projects strive to refine their process, my
experience is that people who start out by
asking project-wide
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Shelley Powers
wrote:
>
> I
> would say if your fellow Google developers could understand how this all
> works, there is hope for others.
"if"
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009May/0064.html
> Shelley
- Sam Ruby
I also recognize that this would require a
parsing change by browser vendors, which also is a cost that needs to
be factored in. But right now, I am interested in how it would affect
the web if this were done.
> --
> Henri Sivonen
> hsivo...@iki.fi
> http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
- Sam Ruby
han alert, but I don't believe all browsers support console,
>> yet.
>
> This misses the point, because the inconsistency is with attributes named
> xmlns:foo.
There is a similar inconsistency in how xml:lang is handled. Discuss.
> --
> Henri Sivonen
> hsivo...@iki.fi
> http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
- Sam Ruby
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Shelley Powers
wrote:
> Sam Ruby wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 2:38 PM, Shelley Powers
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I propose that RDFa is the best solution to the use case Martin supplied,
>>> and we
more is required. But if not, researching into the options
and making recommendations may help.
- Sam Ruby
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Dan Brickley wrote:
> On 17/1/09 19:27, Sam Ruby wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 11:55 AM, Shelley Powers
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The debate about RDFa highlights a disconnect in the decision making
>>> related
>
wg.org/2008-April/014372.html
Key to Ian's decision was the importance of DOM integration for this
vocabulary. If DOM integration is essential for RDFa, then perhaps
the same principles apply. If not, perhaps some other principles may
apply.
- Sam Ruby
On Jan 23, 2008 2:13 PM, Krzysztof Żelechowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> SVG is too heavyweight
> for the purpose of such tiny presentational enhancements.
I can provide counterexamples:
http://intertwingly.net/blog/
http://intertwingly.net/blog/archives/
- Sam Ruby
e don't
want us to make the quotes optional either.
With the latest changes to html5lib, we get a failure on a test named
test_title_body_named_charref.
Before, "A &mdash B" == "A — B", now "A &mdash B" == "A &mdash B".
Is that what we really want? Testing with Firefox, the old behavior
is preferable.
- Sam Ruby
UTC. To convert to UTC I need to add 4 hours.
- Sam Ruby
conclusion that prefix:name
extensions would work differently than in XML. While Python's minidom
does not appear to produce the desired results when I call
getElementById, it otherwise seems to handle the document identically to
the way Firefox does:
http://intertwingly.net/stories/2007/04/10/test.py
- Sam Ruby
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 13:53:21 +0200, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 13:40:39 +0200, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Per HTML5 section 8.1.2.3, however, such an attribute name would not
be considere
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 13:40:39 +0200, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
To give a specific example: say I make my own "mjsml" prefix with
namespace "http://example.org/mjsml";. In HTML4 UAs, to look up an
"mjsml:extension" attribute
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 13:40:39 +0200, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Per HTML5 section 8.1.2.3, however, such an attribute name would not
be considered conformant.
Yes, only attributes defined in the specification are conformant.
I was specifically referr
Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On Apr 10, 2007, at 8:12 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On Apr 10, 2007, at 2:14 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 22:41:12 +0200, Sam Ruby
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How so?
I missed the part where you wanted to
Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On Apr 10, 2007, at 2:14 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 22:41:12 +0200, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
How so?
I missed the part where you wanted to change existing HTML parsers. I
thought Hixie pointed out earlier (by
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 22:41:12 +0200, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
How so?
I missed the part where you wanted to change existing HTML parsers. I
thought Hixie pointed out earlier (by means of examples) why we can't
have namespace parsing in HTML. I
On 4/10/07, Anne van Kesteren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 20:21:27 +0200, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> Or allow any attribute that starts with "x_" or something (to prevent
>> clashing with future revisions of HTML), as private attri
On 4/10/07, Simon Pieters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Or allow any attribute that starts with "x_" or something (to prevent
clashing with future revisions of HTML), as private attributes.
Instead of "starts with x_", how about "contains a colon"?
A conformance checker could ensure that there i
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, Sam Ruby wrote:
People often code things like the following:
one
two
three
Visually, this ends up looking something like
+---+
| |
| one |
| two |
| three |
+---+
with the following CSS rule:
pre { border: solid 1px #000; }
[in
o reduce
impediments / excuses for people indicating that their documents are
intended to be interpreted as standards compliant HTML5.
- Sam Ruby
[1] References:
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#the-pre
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/text.html#white-space-prop
Henri Sivonen wrote:
On Dec 10, 2006, at 02:09, Sam Ruby wrote:
I am asking whether there is interest in identifying ONE standard
serialization that everybody who wishes to comply with could do so.
Why? For digital signatures? For comparing parse trees from different
parsers?
My train of
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 00:29:03 +0100, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
If there is no interest in standardizing a serialization (or separate
standard serializations form HTML5 and XHTML5), then this discussion
belongs on [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list.
t; if such a DOM were
serialized and then parsed by an HTML5 parser, the DOM produced would
differ, as well it should.
If there is no interest in standardizing a serialization (or separate
standard serializations form HTML5 and XHTML5), then this discussion
belongs on [EMAIL PROTECTED] maili
Leons Petrazickis wrote:
On 12/7/06, Alexey Feldgendler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 04 Dec 2006 13:55:32 +0600, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> http://intertwingly.net/stories/2006/12/02/whatwg.logo
> Currently, there wouldn't be one. We could extend HTML5 to have some
sort
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2006, Sam Ruby wrote:
They were made around the same time (Trackback was invented first). My
point was just that Trackback is not a good example of why you need
more attributes in HTML, since there are equivalent technologies that
do it with existing markup
e page. Here's an example:
http://scott.userland.com/2005/11/09.html
- Sam Ruby
Karl Dubost wrote:
Sam,
Le 6 déc. 2006 à 23:13, Sam Ruby a écrit :
My original interest was to write a replacement for Python's SGMLLIB,
i.e., one that was not based on the theoretical ideal of how SGML
vocabularies work, but one based on the practical notion of how HTML
actually is p
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Wed, 6 Dec 2006, Sam Ruby wrote:
The common pattern that I see is that xmlns="".
It's certainly the more common value, but it is by no means the only one,
as you will see if you examine the various examples I gave in more detail.
My bad. Point made.
- Sam Ruby
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Tue, 5 Dec 2006, Sam Ruby wrote:
xmlns attributes are invalid on HTML elements except html, and
when found on unrecognized [elements] imply style="display:none"
unless you recognize the value of this attribute.
There are millions of documents that would
Robert Sayre wrote:
On 12/5/06, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have a request. It would be nice if the sniffing algorithm made an
exception for "text/plain".
It would be nice, but
Use case:
http://svn.smedbergs.us/wordpress-atom10/tags/0.6/wp-atom10-comments.p
reasons.
+1, though I would suggest a one change:
159: 376 // Ÿ
- Sam Ruby
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 15:13:26 +0100, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Count me in. This is actually closer to the original reason why I
originally subscribed to this list. If given a few tests, I could
convert them into a useful form,and this form could serv
his header.
Samples:
http://feedvalidator.org/testcases/
http://feedparser.org/tests/
My goal would be to produce something that I could use within the
feedparser (and therefore, planet).
- Sam Ruby
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Mon, 4 Dec 2006, Sam Ruby wrote:
Independent of what the specs say *MUST* happen, I'd like people to
bring up one or more browsers with a URL from this list, and see if the
browser asked them if they wanted to subscribe. Subscribe is not a
normal feature associated
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Tue, 5 Dec 2006, Sam Ruby wrote:
Case in point:
http://www.intertwingly.net/blog/2006/12/01/The-White-Pebble
In IE, there's some stray "XHTML HTML" and "XHTML HTML XML" text. This
isn't acceptable to most people. It certainly isn't
ript is
likely only a weekend task. This could be designed in such a way that
it was only enabled as an about:config option. Where I would need help
with is in getting it into the codebase. (Robert? You listening?)
- Sam Ruby
respect for you and your work, you are hardly
representative of the majority of Web authors, which is who I have to
primarily take into account when it comes to the spec.
Agreed.
- Sam Ruby
never see an ad served from my site.
- Sam Ruby
loyed, but the worst feet-draggers won't be
affected any worse than they were in the days when was young.
- Sam Ruby
ispatch
based on this information, but that's outside of the control of the
parser. IMHO, the parser itself shouldn't complain when it finds a
HTML4 DOCTYPE, or an XHTML2 DOCTYPE for that matter.
Of course, a lot more HTML4 documents would be valid HTML5 than XHTML 2
documents.
- Sam Ruby
rks if the internal-data-model to HTML5 conversion is
lossless. If it is not, people will find ways with structured comments
or by creating intentionally invalid HTML5 and relying on the error
recovery that is either prescribed or observed to be commonly practiced.
- Sam Ruby
quot; attributes with all kinds of bogus values on the
Web today. I worked for a browser vendor in the past few years that tried
to implement xmlns="" in text/html content, and found that huge amounts of
the Web, including many major sites, broke completely. We can't int
In the hopes that it will bring focus to this discussion:
http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/HtmlVsXhtml
- Sam Ruby
On 12/2/06, Henri Sivonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Dec 2, 2006, at 18:24, Sam Ruby wrote:
> It would not be wise for HTML5 to limit itself to the more constrained
> character set of XML. In particular, the form feed character is
> pretty popular,
BTW, I copy and pasted
On 12/2/06, David Hyatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Shipping Safari has no SVG support. WebKit nightlies do. That's the
only reason the logo now renders correctly in the nightlies so
that particular file is completely irrelevant to this discussion.
I'm confused. Which file? And why is i
r capturing unresolved issues that
need to be worked?
- Sam Ruby
nally produced by the script in the following HTML5 document?
http://intertwingly.net/stories/2006/12/02/whatwg.logo
Any takers?
- Sam Ruby
P.S. That script, complete with indentation and readable variable
names, is still an order of magnitude smaller than
http://whatwg.org/images
On 12/2/06, Lachlan Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Elliotte Harold wrote:
> Most hand authors including myself don't always achieve well-formedness
> because nothing pricks us if we don't.
It does when you use the correct MIME type!
> Even the tiniest annoyance from a bad page, would cause us
ait.org/books/javaio2/
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0596527500/ref=nosim/cafeaulaitA/
- Sam Ruby
re:
http://www.intertwingly.net/blog/2006/12/01/The-White-Pebble
Note: if you go to that page, I'd highly recommend using a browser that
understands the application/xhtml+xml MIME type.
- Sam Ruby
On 11/30/06, Michel Fortin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We can't really have a document that is both HTML5 and XHTML5 at the
same time if we keep the declaration however.
Why not?
- Sam Ruby
he following:
Clearly a fleshed out version of this proposal would preserve the
existing specification behavior (including the parse error) for the
checked/type example, but for the checked/> example it actually could go
either way. I'd personally would allow it.
- Sam Ruby
disappointed to see
portions of this discussion framed in terms that border on the
discussions of epic battles with Zeldman.
- Sam Ruby
e this proposal was,
my intent is that that proposal too will also take great care to only be
minimally invasive.
- Sam Ruby
, and any conformance checker
would only point out such examples.
Note: the two paths above are mere thumbnail sketches. The devil's in the
detail. For example, technically ' would fall on the wrong side the
argument, but as I can see from the current draft of HTML5, the right
decision was already made in that case.
- Sam Ruby
document is supposed to do. But I will get there.
--
Ian Hickson U+1047E)\._.,--,'``.fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A/, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
- Sam Ruby
1 - 100 of 107 matches
Mail list logo
