W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2007

Re: A Concrete Example for the HTML Versioning Debate

From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 14:45:43 +0300
Message-Id: <7A9D2B97-DB5A-4CA3-B469-5DC12A0A2B47@iki.fi>
Cc: public-html@w3.org
To: Jeff Schiller <codedread@gmail.com>

On Apr 18, 2007, at 09:07, Jeff Schiller wrote:

> and people here are proposing a variety of things like:
>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 5.0//EN" "some-url">
> or
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 5.0//EN">
> or
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "HTML5">
>
> all of which are smaller than the existing boilerplate.

A variety of things has been proposed, but so far the merits of the  
proposals about doctypes other than <!DOCTYPE html> have not  
substantiated in comparison to <!DOCTYPE html> plus an optional  
attribute on root in any way other than saying that HTML 4 did it  
too. Specifically, the proposals tend to ignore XML tooling and the  
XHTML5 serialization altogether.

On the other hand, Jirka Kosek, Maciej Stachowiak and I have put  
forward *use cases* that show that *if* there is to be a version  
flag, putting it in an attribute on the root element is going to be  
less painful than putting it in the public id.

Finally, I'd like to call attention to
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/doctype/#xml

-- 
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Wednesday, 18 April 2007 11:46:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:15:53 GMT