- From: Dmitry Turin <html60@narod.ru>
- Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 15:05:02 +0200
- To: public-html@w3.org
David, >> I propose to unify and use <?tag ?> in any case. DH> They have different meanings and are used for different things Try to stand on point of view, that <tag> can be considered like _StdOut_ (standard stream of output), and <?tag?> like _StdErr_ (standard stream of errors). I propose to draw a distinction in this direction. It apparently will be obviously, if you read my file http://sql50.euro.ru/sql5.ppt slide #67-#86 (topic "Developing of XML"). Let <?tag?> will be stream of commands <?finish?> <?dbms?><?book?><?/dbms?> <?nop?> <?dflt?> <?shift?> and errors <?res?> That you have no doubts: i want, that browser _react_ at this commands. P.S. What about stream of data, compare http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-forms/current-work/#x-www-form-xml and my proposals http://html60.euro.ru/site/html60/en/author/quest_eng.htm , http://html60.euro.ru/site/html60/en/author/looker_eng.htm , http://html60.euro.ru/site/html60/en/author/vml-form_eng.htm (on the one hand) with idea of <?tag?> (on the other hand). --- >> Now we have two way to write service information in html-document: >> 1) in <!name > (e.g. <!doctype > DH> A markup declaration. + >> 2) in <?name?> (e.g. <?xml ?>, <?xml-stylesheet ?> DH> A processing instruction. O my god, you are deriving conceptual conclusion from linguistical property. I can't be agreed with this method. DH> so it would never work. + DH> As an example, browsers would not recognize "<?doctype html?>>" Until manufacturers will write code, which react at "<?doctype html?>" and "<!doctype html >" identically. Dmitry Turin HTML6 (6.5.1) http://html60.euro.ru SQL5 (5.9.1) http://sql50.euro.ru Unicode7 (7.2.1) http://unicode70.euro.ru Computer2 (2.0.2) http://computer20.euro.ru
Received on Wednesday, 9 January 2008 13:29:23 UTC