- From: Nick Kew <nick@webthing.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 18:38:57 +0000 (GMT)
- To: Christoph Pper <christoph@paeper.de>
- cc: www-validator@w3.org
On Mon, 11 Nov 2002, Christoph Pper wrote: > > But we know there are bugs in the spec, and that they regard XHTML > > as the bugfix. > > SGML shorttag features are not bugs in the specs--the browsers are the ones > having bugs. On the contrary, HTML specs 3.2 and 4.0 Transitional were expressly designed to formalise what had become a de facto standard at the time. In the case of shorttags it failed to do so, and if anyone noticed at the time, they were ignored. 4.0 Strict differs from Transitional only in the DTD, not the sgmldecl. > I'd be mad at a police officer who stops me in my car for driving too slow, > just because /he thinks/ there should be a minimal velocity. aside: that actually happened to my uncle (or so he told me). > Than they're not validators but advisors. The one hosted by the spec making > institution, should be a real validator. Where were you when w.v.o introduced -wunchar? > IMHO, it should be the other way round, give an option to /disable/ strict > SGML mode. That's a fair POV, but see my reply to Bjoern concerning my reasons to differ. -- Nick Kew
Received on Monday, 11 November 2002 13:39:05 UTC