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

Re: On ampersands.

From: Gerald Oskoboiny <gerald@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2000 23:46:21 -0400
To: "Shane P. McCarron" <shane@aptest.com>
Cc: Paul McGarry <paulm@opentec.com.au>, www-validator@w3.org
Message-ID: <20000705234620.C860@w3.org>
On Wed, Jul 05, 2000 at 10:25:35PM -0500, Shane P. McCarron wrote:
> Paul McGarry wrote:
> > Gerald Oskoboiny wrote:
> > If it really is invalid, why does the html 4.01 spec use the word
> > 'should':
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/charset.html#h-5.3.2
> > which has a different meaning to 'must' if I understand things
> > correctly.
> 
> Because in general the HTML 4.01 spec sucks.  
> 
> Seriously, its conformance indications leave a lot to be desired.

How's that? If it said 'must', it would be incorrect.

I think the HTML 4 spec(s) are exemplary as far as technical
specifications go.

-- 
Gerald Oskoboiny       <gerald@w3.org>  +1 617 253 2920
System Administrator   http://www.w3.org/People/Gerald/
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)      http://www.w3.org/
Received on Wednesday, 5 July 2000 23:46:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:13:54 GMT