- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 18:48:27 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12725
John Thomas <therandshow@gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |therandshow@gmail.com
--- Comment #5 from John Thomas <therandshow@gmail.com> 2012-02-22 18:48:23 UTC ---
It would be nice for authors to have a normative document saying if you author
your XHTML document in this fashion then browsers will produce a DOM equivalent
to the XML version. For the "normative" status to be useful to authors though,
browsers would need to get on board.
However, in a larger sense, the difference between normative and guideline
documents has been blurred with the HTML WG, as the goal of matching
implementations means that the documents are more useful as a way to deal with
current implementers' behavior, rather than a recommendation of how this
behavior ought to be.
As far as I can tell, for the HTML WG, normative and guideline documents are
functionally equivalent except when describing discouraged but allowable
behavior or forward-looking unimplemented behavior.
--
Configure bugmail: https://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, 22 February 2012 18:48:47 UTC