W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2001

RE: transitional vs strict was RE: summary attribute required? history.

From: Mike Paciello <paciello@ma.ultranet.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2001 12:35:49 -0500
To: "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@w3.org>
Cc: "WAI GL" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <LPBBLAFOCBGBPOEHHLNGGELHDPAA.paciello@ma.ultranet.com>
Thanks for the quick response Charles. Since SUMMARY does not fall into this
category, I'm puzzled by why Dave has coded Tidy such that it appears as if
it's not in compliance. I'll have to wait for Dave to respond.

-Mike

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:charles@w3.org]
> Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 12:23 PM
> To: Mike Paciello
> Cc: WAI GL
> Subject: transitional vs strict was RE: summary attribute required?
> history.
>
>
> On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, Mike Paciello wrote:
> [snip]
>   This is also why I am trying to get a clear definition between the
>   distinction of the HTML "transitional" and "strict"
> requirements. By strict,
>   do we mean that all attributes are included, even if the
> attrbute is left
>   null?
>
>   -Mike
>
> There are three flavours of HTML 4 - "strict", "transitional", and
> "frameset".
>
> Using the "strict" version, a number of presentational elements and
> attributes that are valid in the other two versions are not valid. For
> example, most elements which control font are not part of HTML 4 strict.
>
> regards
>
> Charles McCN
>
Received on Monday, 5 March 2001 12:34:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:09 GMT