- From: Dr. Olaf Hoffmann <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 17:33:15 +0200
- To: public-html@w3.org
Simon Pieters: .... > > An element does not need to be defined by a specification in order to > exist in a document. Just take this document: Sure, but it will not exist in a valid document of some specific format. Obviously, there is no way to avoid, that people create arbitrary content in documents, those just have no defined meaning. .... > > You can get into the exact same situation if you pretend that only the > XHTML 1.0 spec is relevant. This has nothing to do with spec versioning or > schemas. Not really, this will result in an invalid document, if one adds arbitrary nonsense. I have not much interest in invalid documents not related somehow to a defined meaning. Ok, it might be relevant for tag soup parsers to care about any nonsense, but it is not relevant for authors of meaningful documents. .... >> This seems to imply that those CSS rules/suggestions apply only to the >> XML >> variant of HTML5 anyway. >No, it doesn't. Hmm, isn't this the purpose of this namespace indication in an CSS file, to indicate that the rules apply only to elements within some specific namespace? If there is a namespace-aware HTML5 tag soup document, why should it apply? Another example - if an XML-document indicates, that those elements belong to the bar-namespace, why should the rule apply? On the other hand, if we have a proper XHTML-document, it will not contain the mentioned elements. Again, the rule never applies. Olaf
Received on Tuesday, 21 June 2016 16:35:57 UTC