- From: Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com>
- Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 09:25:26 -0500
- To: Ben Boyle <benjamins.boyle@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Mynthon Gmail" <mynthon1@gmail.com>, public-html@w3.org
Hi Ben, Looking at your question again: On Jul 7, 2007, at 6:26 AM, Ben Boyle wrote: > Isn't it possible to have compatible syntax already? > Is there any XHTML syntax that is invalid in a HTML document? I know of no UAs where there's a problem. Validators may flag it, but its probably better to consider it a validator issue than anything invalid. > Do any of these cause problems in HTML? Is this valid? > <input type="radio" name="foo" value="bar" checked="checked"/> Again, no UAs that I'm aware of. > What about <?xml prolog, @xmlns, @xml:lang? IIRC, prolog throws IE6 and IE5 into quirks mode. @xmlns:* and @xml:lang should likely be ignored as unknown attributes in most UAs. Though there's nothing to stop us from adding them in HTML5 conforming UAs. > I have noticed the W3C HTML validator is confused by <link ... /> and > <meta ... /> empty tags, but had assumed it to be a valiator bug. I would agree: validator bug. Take care, Rob
Received on Saturday, 7 July 2007 14:25:36 UTC