Re: ISSUE-54: doctype-legacy-compat

On Fri, 2009-01-16 at 16:03 +0100, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
> Henri Sivonen wrote:
> > <!DOCTYPE html SYSTEM "about:sgml-compat"> would seem to fit the 
> > requirements as a legacy generator alternative to <!DOCTYPE html>.
> Based on some further discussion in IRC, these are the advantages of 
> using the SYSTEM identifier with an about: URI scheme.
> * Many people are already familiar with the scheme and so it's
>    memorable.  More so than, e.g., the tag: or data: URI schemes.

I certainly prefer it to system identifiers that aren't
absolute URIs.

Meanwhile, about: is not registered; it probably should be.

The best reference for it that I know of is

 Client-Side JavaScript Reference

The ESW wiki has a pretty good list of URI schemes

Though wikipdia's is perhaps even better; about: is
listed under "Unofficial but common URI schemes"

I sure hope IETF/IANA registry practice starts to feel
more like wikipedia sometime soon.

> * It's shorter than an equivalent http: URI would be
> * It's non-retrievable and so there's no expectation of a DTD.
> * Use of an absolute URI rather than a string like "sgml-compat" that is
>    indistinguishable from a relative URI prevents consumers that attempt
>    to retrieve DTDs from getting 404s from many servers.
> * Typing about:sgml-compat into browsers generally results in an error
>    message or blank page. This helps in pre-empting any bogus
>    rationalisations for why using this one with the URI is better than
>    <!DOCTYPE html> without the URI.
> * As Philip demonstrated earlier, using a SYSTEM identifer is generally
>    more compatible with legacy producers than a lone PUBLIC identifier.
Dan Connolly, W3C
gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E

Received on Friday, 23 January 2009 17:13:04 UTC