- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 23:18:49 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>
- Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Wed, 3 Sep 2008, Jirka Kosek wrote: > > But what is actually more important in regard to concerns previously > raised by Henri and Smylers is which of the following two variants > > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC ""> > > and > > <!DOCYTPE HTML PUBLIC "XSLT-generated"> > > could lead to a greater confusion between not well educated web > developers. The empty string one looks reasonable, which means that it's not an option. The whole point here is to get people to use <!DOCTYPE HTML> and not something else, so we want something that doesn't look reasonable. > IMHO the later variant is worse because without knowing the exact reason > for having this in HTML5 spec one could thing that public identifier > here is place for mentioning which system was used for producing HTML5 > output. So I can imagine that those people who produced pages full of > Java applets and animated GIFs in the late 90s will produce pages > starting with > > <!DOCYTPE HTML PUBLIC "PHP-generated"> > > or > > <!DOCYTPE HTML PUBLIC "Ruby-generated"> > > or > > <!DOCYTPE HTML PUBLIC "<put your favorite processor here>-generated"> Hm, yeah, good point. Ok, I've changed it to XSLT-compat. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 2 September 2008 23:18:50 UTC