[Bug 20993] To facilitate migration, <!DOCTYPE html> should be recommended for the XHTML5 syntax.

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20993

--- Comment #7 from Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Sorry but I am now completely and utterly lost as to what you are expecting
> to get out of this bug.

Do you understand why <meta charset="UTF-8"/> is _"permitted"_ in XHTML5?

Do you understand that by "permitting" <meta charset="UTF-8"/>, then the spec -
or dare I say Ian - actually *forbade* all other incarnations of <meta
charset="*"/>?

A very clever trick, if I may say so. He did not find any justifyable usecase
for <meta charset="ISO-8859-1"/> in XHTML5, for instance. To make it do that,
the spec has to make it an error!

So I want to apply Ian’s trick to <!DOCTYPE html>. Do you have any usecases for
why <!DOCTYPE ROBIN-BERJON> should be permitted in XHTML5? Currently, the
XHTML5 validator issues no error if you do such a thing.

I’m sorry, but to me this is really very obvious. Ian’s idea behind permitting
<meta charset="UTF-8"/> really is to promote the swithching from XHTML to HTML
and vice versa - that's what the spec says, quite literally. However, as we
know, if 

XHTML5 is not _required_ to use <meta charset="UTF-8"/>. Thus, it is fully
permitted to produce XHTML5 which, if consumed as HTML, fails to be parced as
UTF-8.  Likewises, I don't promote that <!DOCTYPE html> should be _required_ in
XHTML5. 

I only want a rule which promotes a HTML5-friendly DOCTYPE if and when a
DOCTYPE use used. The HTML5 spec is the logical place to say this. It can not
be express in a DTD, since DTD does not govern how DTD-less DOCTYPE declartions
look like.

If you still are last, then please ask some questions of critical - or whatever
- nature, so that I can try to understand where you fall of the hook.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Received on Wednesday, 13 March 2013 12:08:36 UTC