W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2010

Re: Bug 7034

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 11:37:15 +0100
To: "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: "Leif Halvard Silli" <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, "Sam Ruby" <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "David Singer" <singer@apple.com>, "Henri Sivonen" <hsivonen@iki.fi>, "Philip Taylor" <pjt47@cam.ac.uk>, "HTMLwg WG" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.u92igdwh64w2qv@annevk-t60>
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 11:33:31 +0100, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>  
> On Mar 24, 2010, at 3:29 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> Also, do we really still need to have arguments over why
>> transitional doctypes are bad (they trigger an inferior rendering
>> mode for one) and why presentational markup is to be avoided?
> I think I understand the value of avoiding quirks mode and almost
> standards mode, enough to explain it. I'm not sure I understand fully
> why presentational markup is to be avoided. Can you provide some
> reasons or point to a good reference?
> I ask because I'm planning to make a wiki page that collects
> rationales for authoring conformance requirements.

Ian posted about this a while back:


Anne van Kesteren
Received on Wednesday, 24 March 2010 10:38:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:00 UTC