- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 10:24:08 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12072
--- Comment #4 from Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> 2011-02-15 10:24:06 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> That it triggers quirks mode in IE is a bug in IE per HTML and I have not seen
> them raise an issue about this yet.
I note that you fall into a "between us vendors" paradigm.
That <?xml version="1.0" ?> triggers quirks ine IE6, is also a bug: it is not
founded on whether HTML4, XHTML1 or HTML5. But I have heard about no other
justification - in public-html - for the prohibition than the IE6-bug. (I have,
also, not heard that Microsoft wanted the XML declaration forbidden.)
As for comments before DOCTYPE, then I will also point to HTML5's section on
"Restrictions on content models and on attribute values" as the ultimate
justification.
http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/introduction#restrictions-on-content-models-and-on-attribute-values
That sections categorizes HTML5's restrictions into, amongst others, the
following types of errors that seems relevant for evaluating whether comments
before <!DOCTYPE html> should be permitted:
* "Errors that involve peculiarities of the parser"
[in truth, it is meant peculiarities in the HTML5 parser and not IE6,
but some of those peculiarities stems from IE.]
* "Errors that would likely result in scripts failing in hard-to-debug ways"
[ fits well! ]
* "Errors that waste authoring time"
[ fits well! ]
* "Errors that involve areas that affect authors migrating to and from XHTML"
[ fits well! ]
* "Errors that indicate a mis-use of other specifications"
[conditional comments & x-ua-compatible is misue of proprietary syntax]
--
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 Tuesday, 15 February 2011 10:24:09 UTC