- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 10:24:08 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12072 --- Comment #4 from Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> 2011-02-15 10:24:06 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > That it triggers quirks mode in IE is a bug in IE per HTML and I have not seen > them raise an issue about this yet. I note that you fall into a "between us vendors" paradigm. That <?xml version="1.0" ?> triggers quirks ine IE6, is also a bug: it is not founded on whether HTML4, XHTML1 or HTML5. But I have heard about no other justification - in public-html - for the prohibition than the IE6-bug. (I have, also, not heard that Microsoft wanted the XML declaration forbidden.) As for comments before DOCTYPE, then I will also point to HTML5's section on "Restrictions on content models and on attribute values" as the ultimate justification. http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/introduction#restrictions-on-content-models-and-on-attribute-values That sections categorizes HTML5's restrictions into, amongst others, the following types of errors that seems relevant for evaluating whether comments before <!DOCTYPE html> should be permitted: * "Errors that involve peculiarities of the parser" [in truth, it is meant peculiarities in the HTML5 parser and not IE6, but some of those peculiarities stems from IE.] * "Errors that would likely result in scripts failing in hard-to-debug ways" [ fits well! ] * "Errors that waste authoring time" [ fits well! ] * "Errors that involve areas that affect authors migrating to and from XHTML" [ fits well! ] * "Errors that indicate a mis-use of other specifications" [conditional comments & x-ua-compatible is misue of proprietary syntax] -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 15 February 2011 10:24:09 UTC