Re: On Henry's comment about documents with DOCTYPE but without markup declaration

On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 12:31 -0500, John Cowan wrote:
> Paul Grosso scripsit:
> 
> > But I understand that Henry is calling some documents such as
> > 
> >    <!DOCTYPE html>
> >    <html/>
> > 
> > invalid and others such as
> > 
> >    <html/>
> > 
> > neither valid nor invalid.

Presumably
 <!DOCTYPE html>
 <html/>
violates the "Validity constraint: Element Valid" - do we need to change

An element is valid if there is a declaration [...]
to
An element is valid if and only if there is a declaration
?

An explicit note on the html doctype might be worth while, with the goal
of heading off future questions on this specific topic.

We could also mention that other specifications (including HTML) may
have a different definition of "valid", or may introduce concepts such
as "Schema-Valid".

I'm not convinced it's worth a new edition of XML :-)

Sorry I wasn't on the call when it was discussed.

Liam


-- 
Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/
Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org freenode/#xml

Received on Tuesday, 28 January 2014 18:26:28 UTC