- From: Daniel Hiester <alatus@earthlink.net>
- Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2000 11:15:43 -0800
- To: "www-html" <www-html@w3.org>
--The interoperability is supposed to stem from the verifiable validity of the markup, i.e. that the content conforms to a certain type. The *mere* presence of a doctype declaration - as some inscrutable string - has no bearing on the needed guarantee. IMHO.-- In my humble opinion, I'd rather see a requirement on a doctype in XML-based markup schemas for the web. I think it's important because we need to establish a concrete way for a UA to distinguish between one type of markup and another. I think that there needs to be a freedom to be very different from HTML in some aspects, as it has a very turbulent history as a "first of its kind" technology. All suchs technologies are going to have little bugs that need to be worked out, and that's nothing to be ashamed of. The object of XML / XHTML should be IMHO to learn from HTML's mistakes, and move onward, not repeat HTML's mistakes. If a UA doesn't have anything more concrete than a doctype to varify that the markup it's reading is indeed "a brave, new..." markup, then it may confuse old with new. Well, I'm just voicing an opinion here; just letting other people review it. (ahhh, direct democracy...) Daniel
Received on Saturday, 15 January 2000 14:12:50 UTC