Ian Hickson wrote: >On Thu, 6 Nov 2003, Jens Meiert wrote: > > >>I noticed two mistakes in the CSS2.1 Working Draft example in >>'Conformance: Requirements and Recommendations' [1]: One the one hand, >>the <head /> element is missing in the example's document source, but >>(correctly) listed in the document tree below. One the other hand, >>shouldn't the used Doctype comply with one of the valid DTD's you should >>normally use [2], e.g. with an HTML 4.01 Doctype? >> >> > >The <HEAD> element is optional in HTML4, and the DOCTYPE given in the >example is perfectly acceptable. > > Actually, I though the HEAD element was required, but its enclosing tags were optional. -- Brant Langer Gurganus http://www.rose-hulman.edu/~gurganblReceived on Tuesday, 13 January 2004 11:32:39 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:25 GMT