- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 17:03:14 +0100
- To: Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>
- Cc: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Jirka Kosek, Tue, 04 Feb 2014 15:26:28 +0100: > On 4.2.2014 13:29, Leif Halvard Silli wrote: >> I don’t follow this logic. For instance, DOCTYPE and DTD is already >> specified. But that does not prevent us from coming up with new DTDs - >> and add them to various new specs. I think it is useful to have a >> document that explains ”the ways to Rome”. > > No one reasonable is going to come up with new DTDs -- DTDs are dead. I did not mean to imply anything about the utility of DTDs. I only meant to derive some logics from how DTDs have been used in various spec. A clearer example of what I meant is that HTML5 defines how to use xml:lang="foo". Why, when how to use xml:lang="" was defined in XML? Simply because there are some things to say about how it should be used, when or if authors want/need to use it. The same way, it is not enough, in my view, to just start littering HTML document with xml:id=*. One should be aware of what one is doing. Not least should one know that there is actually defined a better way, which we are waiting for the implementations of. And thank you very much for helping me to see how HTML5 intends ID assignment to function - I will put that in the spec proposal! -- leif halvard silli
Received on Tuesday, 4 February 2014 16:03:43 UTC