Deviance from SGML (was Re: Version information)

On 13. apr. 2007, at 00.12, Ian Hickson wrote:

> On Thu, 12 Apr 2007, Henrik Dvergsdal wrote:
>> Are you planning to make a standard that is not based on SGML and  
>> XML?
> Our charter requires us to:
> # The Group will define conformance and parsing requirements for  
> 'classic
> # HTML', taking into account legacy implementations; the Group will  
> not
> # assume that an SGML parser is used for 'classic HTML'.
>  --

I find this rather shocking, but it seems to be a fact I'll just have  
to accept.

If you remove the public identifier and/or DTD URL from the doctype,  
the only semantics left is that the document element has to be  
"html". We should consider removing it alltogether.

How are we going to facilitate validation?

In what other ways is our new markup language going to deviate from  


Received on Thursday, 12 April 2007 23:07:38 UTC