- From: <Darxus@ChaosReigns.com>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 15:21:40 -0400
Am I correct in concluding that my best option is to create my own HTML5 DTD, and use a DOCTYPE along the lines of: <!DOCTYPE html SYSTEM "http://www.chaosreigns.com/DTD/html5.dtd"> ? Can the HTML5 spec be modified slightly to say that this sort of thing complies? ( http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#the-doctype ) It seems like if I do create a DTD, I should not permit copying, in order to increase the number of individually created DTDs to check against each other? I'm also open to the possibility of HTML5 specifying some sort of comment stating the HTML version number. Reasons for the above conclusion: An official HTML5 DTD is not desired because official schemas are buggy and people don't fix them, and having only non-official DTDs will improve quality, according to Ian Hixie, March 2009 - http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/help-whatwg.org/2009-March/000192.html Also, there does not appear to be an XML 1.0 conformant way to specify more than <!DOCTYPE html> (which conforms) without specifying a url for a DTD. http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#dt-doctype The bit in quotes is a Public Identifier, which is the entire contents of RFC3151: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3151.txt And the full spec is in ISO 8879:1986 (SGML) which costs US$ 222.525, so I don't know what the Public Text Class ("NONE" above) could be replaced with, other than "ENTITIES". http://www.blooberry.com/indexdot/html/tagpages/d/doctype.htm Another use that occurred to me is the case where someone has thousands of html files, which they want to automatically validate at once, and some of them have been updated to a more recent standard (and they want to make sure they stay compliant with it), but others have not been dealt with yet. On 07/21, Philip Taylor wrote: > <!DOCTYPE html SYSTEM "6"> as the shortest string that provides a Violates XML 1.0 and RFC3151 (Public Identifier). > If you want to check that your pages are compatible with certain > browser releases, the language version number is a very bad > approximation - you'd want a tool that understands what features IE10 > supports (maybe some (but not all) from HTML4, some (but not all) from Indeed. Do you have that information? If not, I would still like the option of noting a version type in my documents. Although the possibility of creating a DTD based on what conforms to standards *and* current browsers are capable of is a fun idea. > like <meta name="check-ua-compatibility" content="ie=10;fx=5"> seems a Cool. -- "For gasoline vapor, the explosive range is from 1.3 to 6.0% vapor to air...useful against soft targets such as...armored vehicles...and bunkers." - http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/dumb/fae.htm http://www.ChaosReigns.com
Received on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 12:21:40 UTC