If it is written standalone it can either be
<root>
<a b1=c1 b2='c2' b3="c3">
<d e>f
</d>
<g><h></g>
</root>
or as fragments
or
<a b1=c1 b2='c2' b3="c3">
<d e>f
</d>
<g><h></g>
as when used for examples, etc
When written standalone as a document it can be
written
<! DOCTYPE hxtml>
<hxtml>
<a b1=c1 b2='c2' b3="c3">
<d e>f
</d>
<g><h></g>
</hxtml>
Namespaces MAY be used with a special attribute
hxtmlns="foo.bar"
but no prefixes
----
Stephen D Green
On 23 February 2011 19:19, Stephen Green <> wrote:
> What if there were a variant of XML which was like
> HTML? It would be typically inserted into HTML
> inside a script element
>
> e.g.
>
> <script type="text/hxtml5">
> <a b1=c1 b2='c2' b3="c3">
> <d e>f
> </d>
> <g><h></g>
> </script>
>
> or
>
> <root>
> <a b1=c1 b2='c2' b3="c3">
> <d e>f
> </d>
> <g><h></g>
> </root>
>
>
> Firstly it doesn't have to have a top level element
> (but it can have) since it can be inserted inside
> other HTML or XHTML elements.
>
> Elements do not have to have closing tags (rules
> determine where missing tags would have been).
>
> Empty elements do not have to have a backslash
> e.g. <h> above, in the spirit of HTML. They are
> presumed to be empty as determined by parsing
> rules, as with HTML.
>
> Attributes do not have to have values (e.g. 'e' above).
>
> Attribute values do not have be surrounded by quotes.
>
> I guess this is distinct from XML5 though which I
> think has the concept of compatibility with XML 1.0.
>
> Might it get more traction in the HTML world?
> ----
> Stephen D Green
>
