Ian Hickson wrote: > Anyone is free to implement formal language definitions, but I see no > reason to make one more "official" than any other. Reference > implementations are often a source of bugs and constrain the development > of the specification in ways that are artificial and unrelated to the > needs of the users and authors ("we can't require that, the grammar > couldn't express it"). > >> - you cannot validate documents against english prose. >> > Sure, you just have a conformance checker that implements the prose. For > example: > > http://hsivonen.iki.fi/validator/html5/ > Just curious: How is it possible to write validation software that is free of bugs whereas isn't not possible to create a reference implementation without said bugs? -- -Mike Schinkel http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/ http://www.welldesignedurls.org http://atlanta-web.org - http://t.oolicio.usReceived on Saturday, 14 April 2007 06:49:54 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:15:53 GMT