W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > April 2007

[whatwg] Script, style and backwards compatibility

From: Simon Pieters <zcorpan@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 11:58:13 +0200
Message-ID: <op.trlcnbx07a8kvn@hp-a0a83fcd39d2>
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 10:31:00 +0200, Anne van Kesteren <annevk at opera.com>  

> On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 10:25:07 +0200, Simon Pieters <zcorpan at gmail.com>  
> wrote:
>> Make <noscript> allowed in XHTML5, and generally remove differences  
>> between HTML5 and XHTML5 where possible.
> The use case it has in HTML5 is that you can include <img src=tracker>  
> or something in there so you have some fallback tracking mechanism.  
> There is no such possibility in XML. It doesn't do any harm either, I  
> suppose, but I wonder what the use case is.

?ke J?rvklo said in  

    Yeah - and I would like to still be able to use something like

       <noscript>Note: Scripting is disabled in your browser, please refer
       to our <a href="...">accessibility policy</a> for the implications of

    regardless if I work in XHTML5 or HTML5 for the moment.

>> This could thus also imply:
>>   * Don't disallow lang="" in XHTML5
>>   * Don't disallow <base href> in XHTML5.
> I agree with these. xml:lang should be treated the same as xml:id imo  
> (except that for now I suppose they have different handling if both the  
> xml: and normal attribute specified).


>>   * Don't disallow <meta charset> in XHTML5 (it doesn't do any good,  
>> but doesn't harm either).
> If it doesn't have any effect wouldn't that be confusing?


Simon Pieters
Received on Monday, 30 April 2007 02:58:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:34 UTC