- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 17:50:26 -0600
- To: Vidiot <vidiot@vidiot.com>
- CC: www-html@w3.org
Hmm... I'm interested to know what led you to take such a detailed look at XHTML spec... you don't seem to be as keen on studying the XML nor HTML specs... Vidiot wrote: [...] > 4.4 Attribute values must always be quoted. As several have noted, that's per XML 1.0. > C.12 Using Ampersands in Attribute Values and that one is from HTML/SGML specs. I think there's an editorial note about it in HTML 2.0... ah yes: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/html-spec/html-spec_foot.html#FOOT26 The justification for many of the issues you raise has been given; I just want to add a bit of motivation for one of them: Vidiot wrote: [...] > 4.3 For non-empty elements, end tags are required. As I and others have noted, that's are a consequence of basing XHTML on XML. As to "why bother," I recommend you take a look at the record of a meeting we had to discuss how HTML should evolve in the face of XML, especially the issues of how to use the DOM and CSS in HTML documents with XML-ish extensions: XML in HTML Meeting Report W3C Note 11 May 1998 http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/NOTE-xh-19980511 In that meeting, we discussed a variety of hacks and kludges for dealing with XML stuff inside tag-soup-HTML; e.g.: Agreement on terminology: XML blocks, significant non-standard HTML elements (sometimes also called sprinkles), and crud (or real-world HTML). What I took away from that meeting was: if you really want to use the DOM and CSS with HTML, especically HTML with namespace-style extensions, you'll have to clean up your end tags and use XML. -- Dan Connolly http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Monday, 31 January 2000 18:53:22 UTC