- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Wed, 8 May 2013 05:32:40 +0200
- To: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
- Cc: public-microxml <public-microxml@w3.org>
John Cowan, Tue, 7 May 2013 22:35:37 -0400: > Leif Halvard Silli scripsit: > >> The comment indicates that the spec document is conforming in more than >> one way - probably as HTML as well as as MicroXML. Whereas the truth >> is that the spec neither conforms as HTML, nor as XML/MicroXML. The >> first, due to lack of proper DOCTYPE, the latter, because of the HTML >> MIME type. > > It's not valid HTML, but validity isn't that important for HTML. The reasons why HTML requires conforming documents to have a valid DOCTYPE, are ’good and sufficient’. Uche Ogbuji, in the IBM article he mentioned,[1] sets a good example when he explains that one can add a DOCTYPE to make a MicroXML document a conforming HTML document. [1] http://www.w3.org/mid/CAPJCua0xxnRAfBpSwT4V_joem3VojGu_E-F8vXqrr=scokCq5A@mail.gmail.com -- leif halvard silli
Received on Wednesday, 8 May 2013 03:33:10 UTC