This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
Section 3.2.3 and its subsections don't mention xml:space as a global attribute for XHTML documents.
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: no spec change Rationale: Indeed. Why would they?
One reason that comes to mind is that it's allowed in XHTML1, and it's not clear why it's a good thing to remove it.
While I consider xml:space presentational it is allowed on any element by XML 1.0 (just like xml:lang, which is mentioned). Also it is mentioned as an attribute in section 8.1.2.3. So clearly it is a attribute "common to and may be specified on all HTML elements".
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: no spec change Rationale: It's not the job of language specifications of languages that use the XML syntax to remind the author of every last XML feature, especially features that have no effect (such as xml:space). To address specific points raised above: - xml:space isn't removed, it's just not relevant. - it's mentioned as an attribute in the parsing section to make parsing work, but that's deep in a user-agent specific section, so I'm not sure that matters. (The same section talks about many things in SVG and XLink, but doesn't discuss them either.) - xml:space can't be specified in HTML elements in text/html.
Ian, can you please clarify whether it's conforming or not? If it is, it needs to be mentioned. If it is not, then this seems to be an incompatible change from XHTML 1.0.
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: no spec change Rationale: Please ask the XML working group, since they invented it. xml:space has nothing to do with HTML. (Note that "incompatible changes" are only of interest if they break real legacy content. Compatibility with previous versions of specs is uninteresting and of no concern.)
Again, can you please clarify whether it's conforming or not? Validator.nu accepts it. Should I report a bug over there?
Allowing xml:space makes it easier to edit XHTML5 in oXygen and possibly other XML editors that use xml:space to control source line wrapping. I suggest permitting xml:space on any element in the http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml namespace and mentioning that xml:space can't be serialized in text/html.
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Partially Accepted Change Description: no spec change Rationale: It's not our job to permit it or not. It's defined by XML, and the XML specification says it's allowed. It would be a layering violation to have any conformance criteria about it. I've added a paragraph explaining this since apparently the XML spec isn't a good enough reference (??).
http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=5526&to=5527
(In reply to comment #9) > Rationale: It's not our job to permit it or not. It's defined by XML, and the > XML specification says it's allowed. It would be a layering violation to have > any conformance criteria about it. Actually, it is. XML defines what it is, but it's up to the vocabulary definition to state where it's allowed (and with what values).
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: no spec change Rationale: No, it's not. Please read the XML spec. It clearly uses RFC2119 terms to allow the use of the attribute.
I'm satisfied with the explanation given by Ian. Time to end the discussion.
"A special attribute named xml:space may be attached to an element to signal an intention that in that element, white space should be preserved by applications. In valid documents, this attribute, like any other, MUST be declared if it is used." The equivalent of "valid" in the context of HTML5 is the prose describing valid documents. The new text now allows xml_space everywhere, whereas it was allowed only on certain elements in XHTML 1.0. This is a change that the differences document should mention then.