[whatwg] Parsing: comment tokenization

The statements about comments can be both true in the following way: the
modern user agents may accept invalid comments while the ancient ones did
not do it, perhaps (correctly) treating <!--> as a runaway comment.
Abandoned Web sites can be fixed: if you are interested, you can create a
mirror and fix it.  A mirror for an abandoned site will not go out of sync.
-----Original Message-----
From: whatwg-bounces@lists.whatwg.org
[mailto:whatwg-bounces at lists.whatwg.org] On Behalf Of Ian Hickson
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2007 10:42 AM
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Parsing: comment tokenization

On Sat, 7 Apr 2007, Nicholas Shanks wrote:
> Even you must (begrudgingly?) admit that "comments" formatted as in your 
> original post are not backwards compatible, even if they do reflect the 
> state of modern UAs as you say.

How can both those statements be true?

> I don't believe I am 'pretending' anything. Just stating that diverging 
> further from SGML for No Good Reason is pointless. (And yes, supporting 
> a few odd websites that do this already counts as not a Good Reason, 
> websites can always be fixed!)

Sadly, Web sites can't always be fixed. Many sites have been long 
abandoned and are no longer updated.

Received on Tuesday, 19 June 2007 09:39:44 UTC