- From: Nick Kew <nick@webthing.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 02:21:23 +0000 (GMT)
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- cc: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>, W3C Validator <www-validator@w3.org>
On Mon, 11 Nov 2002, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
> >Depending on feedback, this may or may not change before release.
> >Prohibiting this particular SHORTTAG feature is strictly speaking up to the
> >HTML WG [...]
But we know there are bugs in the spec, and that they regard XHTML
as the bugfix.
In the case of shorttags,
(a) I'm presuming the current situation is an oversight by the WG.
(b) Though valid de jure HTML, it is not de facto valid. This
is a very clear distinction, and strongly supports (a).
(c) Due to (b), it is an FAQ on this list.
> Exactly. Don't touch their stuff.
Disagree. IMO the approach of htmlhelp and valet (default to
a parse mode that complains of shorttags) is right. Validator
is aiming for more simplicity, so "strict sgml" mode should
be relegated to the "advanced" form.
--
Nick Kew
Received on Sunday, 10 November 2002 21:21:29 UTC