W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2010

Re: ISSUE-4 (html-versioning) (vs. ISSUE-30 longdesc)

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 19:22:46 +0100
Message-ID: <4B8AB476.90406@gmx.de>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
CC: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>, 'Adam Barth' <w3c@adambarth.com>, 'HTML WG' <public-html@w3.org>
On 28.02.2010 18:55, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> ...
> 1) It seems to me that documents with an HTML4 doctype can already be
> distinguished from ones with an HTML5 doctype. In fact, conformance
> checkers are explicitly allowed to defer to an HTML4 validator if they
> see an HTML4 doctype. So examples of requiring HTML4 constructs that are
> invalid HTML5 would not be helped in any way by adding an explicit
> version indicator to HTML5. Now, there may be other problems with this,
> such as not allowing HTML4 to be sent as text/html (depending on what
> ultimately happens with our IANA registration). But that problem is not
> resolved by changing the set of allowed DOCTYPE strings to include ones
> with an explicit HTML5 version indicator.
> ...

That assumes that we actually resolve the media type registration so 
that the HTML4 vocabulary stays valid.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Sunday, 28 February 2010 18:23:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:14 UTC