Re: Version information

Murray Maloney wrote:

> Ian Hickson wrote:
>>> If we use the "short" doctype <!DOCTYPE html> we will confuse people  
>>> who are used to xml, sgml and/or html4.
>> The group of authors that would be confused is far, far outnumbered by  
>> the group of authors who would find the shorter DOCTYPE a significant  
>> improvement and simplification.
> If you aren't going to use a <!DOCTYPE properly, then please don't use  
> it.
> <!DOCTYPE is an important token in SGML and XML. If you aren't intending
> to conform with SGML and XML, please do not use <!DOCTYPE.

Unfortunately, we must -- to trigger standards mode. This is the only  
reason, and it would've been avoided if possible.

> Yes, I gather that you think that it's OK to sabotage SGML and XML  
> software because you think that browser makers are more important than
> any other software developer on the planet

As I think you know that <!DOCTYPE html> is syntactically correct in SGML  
and XML, I don't see what you mean here.

> So, why don't you try to come up with a better way to flag HTML  
> documents?

It's not a way to flag HTML documents, it's used for triggering standards  
mode only.

David Håsäther

Received on Saturday, 14 April 2007 15:30:46 UTC