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

Re: mixed signals on "Writing HTML documents", tutorial, etc.

From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 10:23:57 +0300
Message-Id: <D028C555-1A96-4A78-A6D0-6F6E193156EC@iki.fi>
Cc: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, "Philip Taylor (Webmaster)" <P.Taylor@rhul.ac.uk>, Maurice Carey <maurice@thymeonline.com>, HTML Working Group <public-html@w3.org>
To: Philip & Le Khanh <Philip-and-LeKhanh@Royal-Tunbridge-Wells.Org>

On Jun 19, 2007, at 00:21, Philip & Le Khanh wrote:

> The whole business of the <!DOCTYPE ...> directive I find
> very worrying : I confidently assume that we will continue to
> rely on Validator.W3.Org to check the conformity of our
> HTML documents,

In that case, validator.w3.org will need a software upgrade. It is  
totally unreasonable to expect an SGML validator to be suitable for  
HTML5 conformance checking.

> but how is the validator to know against
> which DOCTYPE to validate if all that is written is
>
> 	<!DOCTYPE html>

If the validator (with upgraded software) sees that doctype, it can  
dispatch to an HTML5 mode.

> ?  If HTML 5 launches a pre-emptive strike on
>
> 	<!DOCTYPE html>
>
> how is an HTML 6 document going to identify itself ?

Either HTML 6 will be compatible so that it doesn't need to tell  
itself apart from HTML5. If the people who define HTML 6 in the  
future don't have the good sense to make their spec compatible,  
surely we can trust them to have the good sense to introduce a  
version discriminator then.

-- 
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Tuesday, 19 June 2007 07:21:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:01 GMT