Lists Home |
Date Index |
- To: <email@example.com>
- Subject: RE: [xml-dev] What is the rule for parsing XML in a namespace inside HTML?
- From: "Joshua Allen" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 10:44:54 -0700
- Cc: "Bjoern Hoehrmann" <email@example.com>,<firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Thread-index: AcRo+3XXfuktzzZdRc+EJVOnUZixkAABIFrQ
- Thread-topic: [xml-dev] What is the rule for parsing XML in a namespace inside HTML?
> I don't know, XHTML only starts to look iffy when considered in terms
> traditional browsers,
I agree with this part. I am just saying it is dumb to tell people to
use XHTML if they are only targeting traditional browsers, and we know
that the browsers and tool support is spotty.
> as fairly straightforward XML document markup it
> seems perfectly reasonable. Even with XML+XSLT+CSS we're dependent on
Now this I disagree with. HTML is a mess. Some tags are semantic, some
tags are presentation-only. It is all jumbled together. It's a very
poor vocabulary, and should be hidden from all but web page designers.
The actual data files should be written using a specific vocabulary with
> The references to RSS are interesting, it's rather like Len's case
> turned inside out - document islands in a data format. But there the
> aggregator points to a completely different species of browser where
> data should (in principle at least) be XML. But content being
The key point is that the data is semantically well-defined. Just
imagine if we had tried to build a universe of aggregators based on
screen-scraping XHTML rather than using moderately well-defined XML
vocabularies. It would have been a disaster. How can anyone say that
screen-scraping XHTML is a good idea??
> in syndicated feeds has to be interpreted somehow, and the options
> currently on the table are escaped HTML or nested/namespace-qualified
> XHTML. The former is a pretty awful approach when the latter is
That is a good point. Storing presentation data as XHTML is not such a
terrible thing, but I still would prefer escaped HTML (because of tools
support). But again, the point is that the machine-processable part
uses a well-defined XML vocabulary, and the presentation part is just an
embedded blob. Mixing them is a terrible idea.