Re: Why HTML should be taught as HTML without pretending it is XML

Karl Dubost wrote:
> If Web designers say, we will come up with an HTML 5 profile that we 
> consider needed for our activity, it can perfectly become an "HTML 5 
> profile for Web pro" specification for this market. I would say that Web 
> Designers on the list have to organize themselves and propose a profile 
> which is compatible with HTML 5 and can be a subset in the syntactic 
> rules.  It can be a different document.

In general, I don't have a problem with coding conventions.  They exist 
for a variety of other languages, such as C++, Java, PHP, etc. and even 
Canonical XML exists for XML.  Perhaps it would be useful to produce a 
Canonical HTML specification.

However, I would recommend that if such a document is produced, all 
guidelines should ideally be backed up with good justification, and not 
simply be a matter of personal opinion.  For example, I would object to 
a guideline that required trailing slashes for empty elements since the 
only valid justification for it is based on personal preferences.

Lachlan Hunt

Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2007 07:57:52 UTC