- From: Ben Boyle <benjamins.boyle@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 19:31:55 +1000
- To: "Philip TAYLOR" <Philip-and-LeKhanh@royal-tunbridge-wells.org>
- Cc: "Jirka Kosek" <jirka@kosek.cz>, "Henri Sivonen" <hsivonen@iki.fi>, "HTMLWG WG" <public-html@w3.org>
I like the wording, and examples are very useful to illustrate the point. <head> <meta charset="UTF-8"> <title>Example HEAD contents</title> <base href="http://www.example.com"> <!-- the order of other link and meta elements is unimportant --> </head> It might also be nice to explain why this order is recommended: 1. identify the language of the document 2. provide the title of the document 3. define the base for all hyperlinks (optional) I kind of like this approach as it is a little more flexible. For example, specifying the charset in the xml prolog matches the above steps, but doesn't require the meta tag. I still like the text edits though, nice work Henri and Philip :) On 10/5/07, Philip TAYLOR <Philip-and-LeKhanh@royal-tunbridge-wells.org> wrote: > > > > Jirka Kosek wrote: > > >> Zero or one meta element(s) with a charset attribute, > >> followed by zero or one base element(s), > >> followed, in any order, by one title element > >> and zero or more other metadata elements such > >> as link, meta, style, and script. > > > > Don't you think that having small schema fragment with content model > > here will be more readable and easier to understand? > > I don't know ! I sent an example of prose on which others > can comment; why not do the same with an example of > a small schema fragment with content model that carries > the same semantics ? > > Philip TAYLOR > >
Received on Friday, 5 October 2007 09:39:09 UTC