Re: [Bug 7727] legacy doc type does not need to be discouraged by "SHOULD NOT" from Julian Reschke on 2009-09-30 (public-html@w3.org from September 2009)

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 10:57:59 +0200
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
CC: public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <4AC31D97.5070700@gmx.de>

Jonas Sicking wrote:
>> >From the issue:
> 
> "There's no point in discouraging the legacy doc type with should not;
> there is no interop problem being solved by it"
> 
> Does this also mean that we shouldn't discourage misnested tags? As
> long as all parsers treat them the same way there also should be no
> interop issues solved by it.

I thought misnested tags are conformance errors, and recipients are 
*allowed* to rehect non-conformant documents.

> I guess this sort of leads back to the whole discussion about if
> defining what is valid or not makes sense, or if just defining
> processing is enough.

Indeed.

In this case however it appears that the choice of text just reflects 
the author's position on the alternate doctype.

BR, Julian

Received on Wednesday, 30 September 2009 08:58:39 UTC