Meeting Record

There are some format problems with the chatlog. Please correct them and reload this page. They are labeled on this page in a red box, like this message.

It may be helpful to

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Steven; I see IA_XHTML2()10:00AM scheduled to start in 8 minutes ←

Mark Birbeck: Lachy...but the problem is whether by observing an event you change that event. ←

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see yamx, alessio, Zakim, RRSAgent, Windrose, Steven, ShaneM, myakura, krijnh, markbirbeck, Lachy ←

... I proposed XHTML docs should be parsed as XML, regardless of the media type ←

... But Hixie and someone else was up in arms, but the validator team seems to agree. ←

Tina Holmboe: I agree. The mime type has nothing to do with the grammar, and the validator is checking the grammar ←

Unknown Lachy: without respecting the MIME type, how do you intend to detemine if a document really is XML? Content sniffing? ←

... Others think that there should be conformance checking as well as validation ←

Shane McCarron: For purposes of validation, the parsing mode must be XML because XHTML *is* XML, and our DTDs are XML DTDs. ←

RESOLVED: For purposes of validation, the parsing mode must be XML because XHTML *is* XML, and our DTDs are XML DTDs. (regardless of media type) ←

Unknown Lachy: but text/html is not defined for content that requires XML processing. Content using that MIME type should (officially, according to HTML4) be SGML ←

Lachy, as chair, I have to tell you that you are not a member of the WG, and therefore we are obliged not to take your comments into account during WG meeting. You are free however to send comments to the list. ←

Shane McCarron: We have this thing on the charter, and we know what it is called and what it is for. I just want to make sure we agree what it is about ←

... we are taking the access module from XHTML2 and making it into a module to be used with M12N ←

Mark Birbeck: All that I meant was XHTML 1.1+ stuff; this sounds as good as any ←

Mark Birbeck: By standardising on hooks like this, it does allow UAs to have something eventually ←

Shane McCarron: What happens with IE if it finds an access element in the head? ←

Unknown _alessio: some blind people associations say accesskeys are not so useful ←

Shane McCarron: This helps me structure the module. I'd welcome a volunteer to help me put it together. ←

Tina Holmboe: Since my primary focus is accessibility, once I'm up to speed, I'd be happy to help ←

ACTION: Alessio to test 'popular' browsers on whether an access element in the head of a document turns up in the DOM ←

Shane McCarron: In this case, Mimasa produced a non-normative schema, and he just mirrored the DTD ←

Shane McCarron: We don't support that attribute in M12N 1.1.... maybe in Legacy? ←

Shane McCarron: This has nothing to do with us; it is only the SVG bit that is in error ←

Steven Pemberton: I'm meeting with Steve next week, and we will put our agendas again ←

Shane McCarron: Mark, will you test the changes that are a result of the Schema WG suggestions? ←

ACTION: Steven to send pointers to additions for Drafts page (RDFa stuff) ←

Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were Steven, ShaneM, alessio, yamx, +04670855aaaa, Windrose, Mark_Birbeck, _alessio ←

Steven Pemberton: Call next week? Mark and I will be in Banff for WWW2007, but I should be able to make it ←

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see AGraf|mb, AGraf, _alessio, Zakim, RRSAgent, Windrose, Steven, ShaneM, myakura, krijnh, markbirbeck, Lachy ←

Unknown Lachy: Windrose, are you the same Tina I've been discussing HTML5 with on www-html? ←

Unknown Lachy: that would be me, yes. Good afternoon, Lachlan. [ Scribe Assist by Unknown Windrose ] ←

Unknown Lachy: I've recently joined XHTML2WG - HTMLWG is still up in the air for me, but I am considering it. [ Scribe Assist by Unknown Windrose ] ←

Unknown Lachy: ok, fair enough. I thought you would join and raise your formal objection to the adoption of HTML5 ←

Unknown Lachy: anyway, the XHTML2 WG should work out well for you, you seem to share many of the same views ←

Unknown Lachy: the work'll be interesting, yes. [ Scribe Assist by Unknown Windrose ] ←

Unknown Lachy: but one thing I would really like clarification on, is why do you object to HTML5 defining how UAs should process bad content, given that the authoring requirements more closely match your goals (minus the few presentatioal elements you already objected to) ←

Unknown Lachy: I'm certain that's a discussion better had on the mailing-list? At the moment it seems I'm getting no mail from either of them, but I'm sure that'll get sorted. In brief, however, I am not objecting to HTML 5 having rules for how to handle bad content. I'd rather like to see a "Ignore tags not in the standard" rule myself. [ Scribe Assist by Unknown Windrose ] ←

Unknown Lachy: what exactly does "ignore" mean in that context? Don't add it to the DOM? Add it to the DOM, but do nothing with it? other? ←

Unknown Lachy: but if it's in the DOM, then something has to be done with it (even if it's just render it as display: inline;), and also the parsing requirements need to deal with how to handle tags for unknown elements ←

Shane McCarron: Surely the DOM construction rules are governed by the DOM spec. ←

Unknown Lachy: the DOM spec doesn't define how to construct a DOM from the serialisation ←

Unknown Lachy: I'm sure the details could be worked out. [ Scribe Assist by Unknown Windrose ] ←

Shane McCarron: XHTML (via the XML DOM) has all elements present in the DOM. ←

Unknown Lachy: the XML spec doesn't either, but it can at least be extrapolated from the syntax ←

Unknown Lachy: there are some cases in HTML where certain tags are ignored and those elements aren't added to the DOM (needed for compat) ←

Shane McCarron: I have to bail on this conversation - next meeting already started. later ←

Weekly XHTML2 WG Teleconference

Minutes of 02 May 2007

1. Announcements

2. Validator

3. Access module

4. Recent issues