- From: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
- Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 21:18:18 +0100
- To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- CC: public-html@w3.org
On 06/11/12 19:49, Leif Halvard Silli wrote: > First, when in XHTML mode, then BlueGrifon and SeaMonkey Composer are > already relatively polyglot. (The only exceptions is, I think, the XML > encoding declaration, which it inserts even for HTML files. Plus that > it uses <meta http-equiv=* caontent=* /> - which never is allowed per > HTML5, not even in pure XHTML5. It could even seem as if BlueGriffon > adheres to the restriction to only have "safe" content inside <script> > and <style>.) > > Second, if BlueGriffon were serious about polyglot markup, then e.g. > BlueGrifofon’s Wizard function did not need to ask me choose between > HTML formats and also did not need to ask me about the encoding. Also, > for generated files, then I would be able to choose the format simply > by changing the file suffix. I look forward to that day. Leif, the <meta> issue is known and filed as a bug. Next version coming. Second, if BlueGriffon did what you outline above - and I tried - users will still be pinging about it, requesting html5 or xhtml5 and encoding settings. Writing a spec is one thing; having it match the market and users' expectations is another one, sorry. </Daniel>
Received on Tuesday, 6 November 2012 20:18:43 UTC