- From: Gareth Hay <gazhay@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 18:37:28 +0100
- To: "Jeff Schiller" <codedread@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org, www-html@w3.org
I don't think it matters. UAs /are/ going to go down that route anyway. I really think it's time to move on, like I said early, even if the spec was to specify "draconian" rules, the UAs wouldn't implement them, so let's just move along. G On 4 May 2007, at 17:41, Jeff Schiller wrote: > Woof! Ok, I'd like to apologize for getting off into "analogy" world > here. To get things back on track: > > Gareth, is the technical motive behind your position that you believe > user agents may incorrectly process non-conforming documents ? If the > HTML5 spec covers how the user agents should process non-conforming > documents, then I fail to see how this would be possible. > > Jeff > > On 5/4/07, Jeff Schiller <codedread@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 5/4/07, Gareth Hay <gazhay@gmail.com> wrote: >> > I'm sure we are all aware that grammatical errors in texts /can/ >> > completely mislead a reader unintentionally. >> >> Sure, I will concede this. There are some grammatical errors that >> can >> mislead a reader unintentionally. There are other errors that a >> reader can perfectly understand without any loss of meaning. But >> does >> not mean you should place a draconian restriction that all >> communication must be grammatically correct or the communication is >> disallowed? >> >> That may be fine for libraries consisting of legal or medical >> libraries, but not for libraries available to the masses. I >> certainly >> still want to read my Huck Finn and Robinson Crusoe... >>
Received on Friday, 4 May 2007 17:37:35 UTC