- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 04 May 2007 14:13:46 +0200
- To: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>
On Fri, 04 May 2007 13:48:13 +0200, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: >> The other advantage of keeping the conformant class smaller in this >> particular case is to encourage authors to write documents that are >> backwards compatible with older user agents. Because relying on some of >> the specific quirks in the HTML5 parser algorithm might not guarentee >> that. The error handling has evolved over the years and some browsers >> may not recover in the same way as others currently. > > Playing the devil's advocate: in which case the best enocuragement for > authors to produce conforming documents would be if UAs did *not* use > the HTML5 parser, making it essential for authors to produce conforming > docs in the first place. Specifying interoperable parsing rules on the other hand doesn't have much to do with encouraging authors. That's solely there to foster interoperability between UAs for various reasons already given on this list. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Friday, 4 May 2007 12:13:50 UTC