[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Feedback on 0.3 Format
On 19 Dec 2003, at 5:38 pm, Sam Ruby wrote:
What bothers me more is calling option 2 html. Particularly as a
significant portion of the titles out in the wild are of form 2:
intended to be text/plain (i.e., no markup present), and yet are
escaped in this fashion.
Telling such content producers to not escape their data in this
fashion is a non-starter. Telling such content producers to mark
their content as if it were html invites the inclusion of markup,
which many feel is undesirable.
But it is already HTML and should be labeled as such! It contains an
< which is part of HTML's layer of escaping, nothing to do with
mode="escaped". The double-escaping when using text/html mode=escaped
comes from 1*XML + 1*HTML, not 1*XML + 1*mode="escaped".
"It is the intent of the author that you should apply a level of
unescaping to what's in the Infoset (i.e. after one level of XML
unescaping) and expect to get markup that will be meaningful to the
application that processes the content."
"It is the intent of the author that what's in the Infoset (i.e. after
one level of XML unescaping) is a data string of MIME type 'type'"
(Note the second covers two attributes, and in one much less tortuous
The name "escaped" has never been very appropriate, so deriving
behavior from it is even less so.