Re: [xml-dev] HXTML5

[Stephen Green <stephengreenubl@gmail.com>]

Mmm. I had somehow gotten the idea that the browser vendors
were pushing back on parsing XML natively within the browser
(pushing back on the XML DOM and just sticking to the HTML
DOM). My idea is that, if the browser users so much need to have
extensibility but find this push-back by the browser vendors versus
the XML DOM is acting against their interests in that direction, then
maybe the users and vendors could meet halfway with extensibility
via something closer to the HTML DOM. So the idea I had was
that browser vendors could extend the HTML DOM with something
akin to what is there already, as (re)defined by WHATWG, but
which gives extensibility halfway to what XML gives. I would think
the browser vendors in WHATWG could define the parsing rules
which suit them and which make implementation no more painful
than with HTML5. This would thus be a matter of extending the
HTML DOM to cater for what I called 'HXTML5' or something like
it in cases where having to make two different DOMs (HTML and
XML) work side-by-side in the same browsers.

----
Stephen D Green



On 23 February 2011 19:43, Greg Hunt <greg@firmansyah.com> wrote:
> And it would be as easy to parse, for those of us who are not browser
> vendors, as html is.  Why do that?
> XML has traction in the HTML world already and the changes that you suggest
> won't make it any more usable and will increase the number of technology
> variants that we have to deal with.  This is the problem with all this talk
> of new kinds of XML, our technology usage is driven by the tools that are in
> the environment (which is I suspect why I is see RelaxNG in forums like this
> but I almost never see it anywhere else) and tends to complicate life when
> we have a family of related but overlapping standards - choosing one under
> those circumstances is more likely to cause a religious war.
>
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 6:19 AM, Stephen Green <stephengreenubl@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> What if there were a variant of XML which was like
>> HTML? It would be typically inserted into HTML
>> inside a script element
>>
>> e.g.
>>
>> <script type="text/hxtml5">
>> <a b1=c1 b2='c2' b3="c3">
>> <d e>f
>> </d>
>> <g><h></g>
>> </script>
>>
>> or
>>
>> <root>
>> <a b1=c1 b2='c2' b3="c3">
>> <d e>f
>> </d>
>> <g><h></g>
>> </root>
>>
>>
>> Firstly it doesn't have to have a top level element
>> (but it can have) since it can be inserted inside
>> other HTML or XHTML elements.
>>
>> Elements do not have to have closing tags (rules
>> determine where missing tags would have been).
>>
>> Empty elements do not have to have a backslash
>> e.g. <h> above, in the spirit of HTML. They are
>> presumed to be empty as determined by parsing
>> rules, as with HTML.
>>
>> Attributes do not have to have values (e.g. 'e' above).
>>
>> Attribute values do not have be surrounded by quotes.
>>
>> I guess this is distinct from XML5 though which I
>> think has the concept of compatibility with XML 1.0.
>>
>> Might it get more traction in the HTML world?
>> ----
>> Stephen D Green
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>
>> XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS
>> to support XML implementation and development. To minimize
>> spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.
>>
>> [Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
>> Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@lists.xml.org
>> subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@lists.xml.org
>> List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>> List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
>>
>
>