- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 20:59:08 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5803 Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED Resolution|WONTFIX | --- Comment #4 from Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz> 2008-06-25 20:59:08 --- (In reply to comment #3) > Ah. Well, that's unfortunate. I guess XSLT will have to be updated. Why XSLT should be updated? Given how many effort is spent making HTML5 compatible with already deployed technology (web browsers) I don't understand why adding possibility of specifying *optional* string in !DOCTYPE is not possible? > In the > meantime you can do: > > <xsl:output method="html" doctype-public=""/> > > ...which will only generate one (minor) parse error. I would like to hear what's wrong with allowing <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML5//EN"> With such provision there will be no parse errors, even minor, in XSLT generated content. > Or you can use something > other than XSLT, which would be my advice. Sorry Ian, but if you are acting as HTML5 spec editor here, you should try to improve spec and its interoperability with other technologies. If you don't like XSLT, simply don't use it. But there is many people who successfully rely on XSLT processing. It looks little bit cocky to cut off those people from ability to generate HTML5 output only because you seem to have sort of XSLT alergy. I bet that without possibility of generating valid HTML5 by XSLT 1.0 & 2.0 as currently defined, HTML5 will not pass last call in W3C. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 25 June 2008 20:59:43 UTC