On Aug 1, 2004, at 06:10, Matthew Thomas wrote: >> Now, similar argumentation does not work on the HTML side if we agree >> not to pretend that real SGML is being processed. Doctype sniffing is >> a tag soup solution to a tag soup problem. > > That's an extrapolation from a single data point. The only use of > doctype sniffing *so far* has been to handle quirky style/layout > expectations of old pages (and in the case of table style inheritance, > they wouldn't even need to be tag-soup pages). In the long run, > doctype sniffing may become a general-purpose method of changing *any* > undesired behavior (whether de-facto or de-jure) of old syntax in new > spec versions. From an XML or SGML point of view the syntactic construct is not appropriate for such use. That's why I said doctype sniffing is a tag soup solution. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen at iki.fi http://iki.fi/hsivonen/Received on Sunday, 1 August 2004 09:46:06 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:36 UTC