W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 2000

Re: Doctype detection

From: fantasai <fantasai@escape.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 01:36:56 -0400
Message-ID: <397FCA77.AF2D7468@escape.com>
To: www-style@w3.org
(Referring to message from Jan Roland Eriksson to www-style
 dated Wed, 26 Jul 2000 19:35:04 +0200)

A rather large part of your "line of reasoning" is based
on the fact that RFC 1866 says that a user agent "should"
assume an HTML2 doctype for text/html documents without one.

I am saying that since you are taking that "should" with so
much weight, why are you not giving equal weight to the
"should" in the parsing instructions?

You are picking out a specific "should" that you want Mozilla
to follow; you /can/ choose to honor some "should"s and ignore
others. Nowhere do I see a statement that says if you follow
one "should", you are required to follow all other "should"s.
The same goes for recommendations.

If Mozilla chooses not to follow a certain "should", it is
still a conforming user agent, (and whether "results" are
"undesirable" is a matter of opinion, always).


                                                ~fantasai

P.S. I really cannot follow your "line of reasoning". I mean,
     I can follow what you're trying to say regarding the
     superiority of RFC 1866's doctype assumption rule, but I
     don't see how it relates to the conclusion (the last two
     paragraphs).
Received on Thursday, 27 July 2000 01:36:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:05 GMT