W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > January 2000

Re: Validator errors

From: Bless Terje <link@rito.no>
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 19:02:43 +0100
Message-ID: <22FD5BD2DBC5D211BE0D0008C7A4E87FD9B41A@odin4.rito.no>
To: "'W3C Validator'" <www-validator@w3.org>
Harold A. Driscoll <harold@driscoll.chi.il.us> wrote:

>>>You can't make XHTML the default for documents without 
>>>a DOCTYPE; it'll break just about anything out there.
>
>While acknowledging that many documents do not have a DOCTYPE 
>statement, I'm far from convinced that anything near "just about
>anything out there" is so lacking.

Then I won't try to do so, but rather gently suggest you attempt
to verify your assumption with empirical evidence gathered first
hand from popular spots around the web.


BTW, If you get any more polite, well spoken, and articulate, I'll
start putting Dear Sir at the beginnning of my replies. You're
making me embarrased at my own vocabulary, grammar, language skills,
and common courtesy. :-|


>>>The only way to handle this that won't break badly is to assume that
>>>text/xml is XML, text/xhtml is XHTML, text/html is HTML 4.01[0],
>>>unless a DOCTYPE is given in which case the DOCTYPE is used.
>
>Huh? I too am lost on this statement.

Given a document which is labeled as "text/html" -- and the absence of
a DOCTYPE declaration that further specifies what, uhm, "flavour" of
HTML it contains -- what would be the most reasonable assumption?

Gerald recently postulated that it would be XHTML 1.0 and Dan concurs.

I would claim the most reasonable assumption would be that it is in
fact some form of HTML, as the label said, and -- given the range of
HTML variants in common use on the Internet today, their relative
popularity and richness -- that HTML version 4.01 Transitional is the
most likely and useful version to assume.

Recall that HTML is an Application of SGML whereas XHTML is an
Application of XML. Why would I assume that something that was
explicitly labeled as SGML, is really XML? If the label says
"Fertilizer", why would I assume it is "Agent Orange"?


`course, if you find an unmarked container that might be Agent Orange,
you damn sure arent going to sprinkle it all over your lawn... :-)
Received on Monday, 31 January 2000 13:02:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:13:53 GMT