- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2007 13:10:55 +0300
- To: Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>
- Cc: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, Daniel Schattenkirchner <schattenkirchner.daniel@gmx.de>, public-html@w3.org
On Mar 25, 2007, at 12:38, Jirka Kosek wrote: > Henri Sivonen wrote: > >>> In XSLT you are not able to output just: >>> >>> <!DOCTYPE html> >>> >>> This is serious limitation of HTML5 as amount of content produced by >>> XSLT is enormous. >> >> It is a limitation of XSLT! > > Interesting. I'm quite surprised that many people coming from WHATWG > camp are somewhat flexible with arguments. > > Once support for legacy stuff is treated as something to which HTML5 > must fits completely (e.g. <!DOCTYPE html>, <meta charset="...">). > Other > time, 8 years old technology which is widely deployed (XSLT 1.0) is > accused of not supporting HTML5. Server-side technologies are upgradable (subject to cost). Deployed browsers are out there. In general, changes that don't bring new functionality and are incompatible with existing *browsers* are not OK in the WHATWG. Requiring ocean boiling and rearchitecting server-side technologies is not OK. Requiring incremental changes to the server side is, in general, OK. (XSLT is bit of a hot button. XSL-FO more than a bit. ;-) > The question is what do will less harm (I'm talking only about HTML > serialization): > > 1. Requiring <!DOCTYPE html> > > 2. Allowing <!DOCTYPE html> > > 3. Requiring either <!DOCTYPE html> or <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "..."> I'd be OK with spec text that makes a given PUBLIC id conforming, says that it doesn't map to any DTD, says that it exists for compatibility with tools that can't produce a doctype without a public id and says that those who don't suffer from such tool limitations should not bother to use it. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Sunday, 25 March 2007 10:11:00 UTC