XHTML support in HTML script extraction

[ByteEater-pl]

The spec contains special handling for text/html resources. Lack of application/xhtml+xml seems an unfortunate omission.

[gkellogg]

XHTML is no longer an actively maintained specification (marked superseded now), so is not specifically mentioned. Neither is HTML4. However, JSON-LD should embed just fine in either, although there may be some considerations for how to encode script content.

[azaroth42]

Propose close, intentionally omitted.

[ByteEater-pl]

XHTML is no longer an actively maintained specification (marked superseded now), so is not specifically mentioned.

The HTML 5.2 spec contains the IANA registration of the application/xhtml+xml MIME type [1].

However, JSON-LD should embed just fine in either, although there may be some considerations for how to encode script content.

I was referring to HTML script extraction [2]. The current spec seems to make it work only for content served as text/html and gratuitously not with application/xhtml+xml.

[1] https://www.w3.org/TR/html52/iana.html#application-xhtmlxml
[2] https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld11-api/#dfn-html-script-extraction

[iherman]

This issue was discussed in a meeting.

• RESOLVED: We accept that syntax and api should also refer to XHTML where they refer to text/html

View the transcript

4.1. XHTML vs HTML
Rob Sanderson: #244
Rob Sanderson: gkellogg objected that XHTML is not an active spec
… but the author or the issue noted that application/xhtml+xml is one of the content-types specified for HTML 5.2
Ivan Herman: my initial reaction was the same as gkellogg, but the latest argument is compelling
Rob Sanderson: https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld11-api/#dfn-html-script-extraction
Ivan Herman: but since both content-types are for the same format,
… all we have to do is add “or ‘application/xhtml+xml’” whenever we mention ‘text/html’
… Also, epub still refers to XHTML.
Gregg Kellogg: my concern was that XHTML 1.0 would use different encoding for scripts.
… If this is just about accepting ‘application/xhtml+xml’ for HTML5, this is not a problem.
… I would rather not wait on this thing. It is easy to get lost.
Ivan Herman: if we want to republish something between now and end of CR,
… this is borderline to substantial change.
Gregg Kellogg: we will have the same problems with other issues.
Ivan Herman: many things that will come up are hopefully editorial.
Rob Sanderson: given the other issues, we will probably want to update the CR.
… considering this is day 1, and we already have a list of issues and associated PRs.
Ivan Herman: we are not talking about going back to WD.
… but we need to go to the director again if we make non-substantial changes.
Gregg Kellogg: last week we resolved that changes in the text of the algorithms
… that does not change the result of any test suite,
Gregg Kellogg: https://www.w3.org/2018/json-ld-wg/Meetings/Minutes/2019/2019-12-06-json-ld#resolution3
Gregg Kellogg: would be considered editorial.
Rob Sanderson: but surely we were referring the existing test suite
Gregg Kellogg: dlehn proposed to add new tests, to address some corner cases
… I thing resolution3 is about “not changing the result of any existing test”
Proposed resolution: We accept that syntax and api should also refer to XHTML where they refer to text/html (Rob Sanderson)
Gregg Kellogg: +1
Ivan Herman: +1
Rob Sanderson: +1
Harold Solbrig: +1
Pierre-Antoine Champin: +1
David I. Lehn: +1
Benjamin Young: +1
Resolution #2: We accept that syntax and api should also refer to XHTML where they refer to text/html

[iherman]

Reopening this; better to keep it open until the changes are done in the document.