- From: Smylers <Smylers@stripey.com>
- Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 17:54:15 +0000
- To: public-html@w3.org
Lachlan Hunt writes: > I am asserting that it should not make normative statements regarding > document conformance because it can, by definition, only describe the > overlap of the HTML and XHTML serialisations. All of the constraints > descrived in it are inherently logical conclusions from the normative > requirements in HTML5, and as such, do not need to be normatively > defined twice. > > The document should clarify that everything within it is > non-normative. Currently, only the introduction is labelled as > such. Lachlan, would you object to the Polyglot HTML spec normatively defining the term "polyglot HTML" (or similar), if the definition were simply that it's the intersection of text/html and XHTML, and if that were the only thing that spec claimed to be normative about? Cheers Smylers -- New series of TV puzzle show 'Only Connect' (some questions by me) Mondays at 20:30 on BBC4, or iPlayer: http://www.bbc.co.uk/onlyconnect
Received on Monday, 5 November 2012 21:23:49 UTC