[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: RFP: Namespace URI for HTML
> > I'm very surprised that the list does not include the current > > approach taken by the HTML WG. This poll seems to suggest that > > one namespace for every flavor of XHTML is the only right choice. I > > agree with Tony and others who consider 3 namespaces as a > > possible solution. > > I think a lot of folk are still waiting to hear a good reason > why more than one is needed ... given that the vocabulary (HTML) > is distinct from the rules (transitional/strict/frameset) that > may be used to assemble them, both now and in the future. Okay - here we go. The namespaces concept, at least in the view-point of some individuals, is a very abstract concept. The namespace is a collection of names, regardless of document type. Given that theory, we could think of the HTML vocabulary as a single namespace. Every flavor or variant of XHTML belongs to the single XHTML namespace. Namespaces are also used for identification, especially, the value of the xmlns attribute is to indicate to which namespace this document instance, fragment or element belongs. If there is no indication of the flavor of XHTML, we come out with the following scenario: Strict, Transitional and Frameset may all have the same <p> and the same <h1>, but that alone does not imply that it is all the same thing. In fact there are substantial differences between these three variants. An application processing a specific XHTML document instance has no indication to which kind of XHTML this document instance belongs. Why is this important? The major HTML browsers don't care, they can process any HTML regardless of type. This will change in the future. In fact, we have an array of specialized user agents coming up. If we talk about the future of HTML, keep in mind that we will see HTML in many different environments. XHTML is not designed to make life better for heavy user agents, moreover, XHTML is the key for the web to rapidly expand to other devices than the desktop PC. A heavy user agent might not care, but for a microbrowser in a cell phone, there is a huge difference between strict and frameset. Why not introduce a custom "variant indentification system" for XHTML? Possible solution: re-introduce the version attribute on the HTML root element specifying the XHTML variant. The problem here are fragments. I want to include a piece of XHTML in a document instance other than XHTML. Again, for many user agents, there is big difference between allowing a <frameset> to be included anywhere in an XML document instance or just basic, strict XHTML that is much cleaner and requires less resources and implementation costs. The version attribute on the HTML root element is not there when any xhtml element is included somewhere in another XML document instance, the only thing we have for identification is the value of the xmlns attribute. Unfortunately, I must stop here. There are more reasons why the HTML WG has chosen 3 namespaces. I'll be happy to continue this conversation later. Best regards, Sebastian Schnitzenbaumer --- Stack Overflow AG Phone: +49-89-767363-70 xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1 To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; (un)subscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|