- From: Geoffrey Sneddon <foolistbar@googlemail.com>
- Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 20:16:33 +0000
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: HTML Issue Tracking WG <public-html@w3.org>
On 27 Feb 2008, at 22:20, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 22:58:02 +0100, Geoffrey Sneddon <foolistbar@googlemail.com > > wrote: >> On 27 Feb 2008, at 21:51, Anne van Kesteren wrote: >>> I'm pretty sure I remember the tokenizer making a difference >>> between the empty string and it being absent. Are you sure? >> >> I don't see anything (looking even closer than before) about it. > > From > > http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/section-tokenisation.html > > "When a DOCTYPE token is created, its name, public identifier, and > system identifier must be marked as missing, ..." > > "Set the DOCTYPE token's system identifier to the empty string, ..." That's an awfully long way from where it is defined as being missing — could it be mentioned in parenthesis in 8.2.4.7. The initial insertion mode (where the list of DOCTYPEs that triggers quirks is) when it is missing?. Also, it seems that it never actually sets it to be _not_ missing anywhere. -- Geoffrey Sneddon <http://gsnedders.com/>
Received on Monday, 3 March 2008 20:16:57 UTC