[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: XML5: Re: MicroXML

• From: rjelliffe <rjelliffe@allette.com.au>
• To: <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
• Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 01:38:41 +1100

 On Tue, 14 Dec 2010 13:17:17 +0000, David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk> 
 wrote:
> On 14/12/2010 13:00, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
>> Really? Is that deliberate? I thought one of the goals of HTML 5 was
>> to make sure parsers reported the same parse tree no matter what
>> garbage you threw at it.
>
> same parse trees as other html5 parsers yes, but radically different
> trees than an XML parser would produce from the same markup.
>
> I've no complaint with html5 having defined fixup rules to give
> consistent error recovery from overlapping markup and other horrors,
> but I think the fact that it parses well formed XML and produces
> different trees is just wrong.

 That HTML5 may do strange things when presented with HTML/mathml/svg 
 elements
 is rather par for the course!

 I was thinking about how it behaves with XML with names not in
 HTML/MATHML/SVG.


 Cheers
 Rick

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XML5: Re: MicroXML
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>

• References:
  • MicroXML
    • From: James Clark <jjc@jclark.com>
  • Re: MicroXML
    • From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
  • XML5: Re: MicroXML
    • From: rjelliffe <rjelliffe@allette.com.au>
  • Re: XML5: Re: MicroXML
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
  • Re: XML5: Re: MicroXML
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@ibiblio.org>
  • Re: XML5: Re: MicroXML
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>