- From: Matthew Brealey <webmaster@richinstyle.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 10:19:00 +0100
- CC: www-style@w3.org, www-html@w3.org
Ian Hickson wrote: > > On Tue, 25 Jul 2000, Matthew Brealey wrote: > > > > 2. Nowhere in the spec does it say: 'if you don't include a DOCTYPE, the > > browser can screw things up': IT SHOULDN'T MATTER. > > Just for the record, you are wrong. > > Section B.1 of HTML 4.01 states: > > # This specification does not define how conforming user agents handle > # general error conditions [...] > > Since error handling is undefined, screwing things up is a perfectly > valid response. As is cooking some toast, dialling the FBI or starting > up the screensaver. (Obviously this doesn't apply to transitional dtd, for which the doctype-detecters will trigger bug mode). Is this really a valid response? Is it: (a) legitimate for browsers to employ doctype-detection in order to trigger more (CSS) bugs? (b) really an error response to HTML to break CSS? ----------------------------------- Please visit http://RichInStyle.com. Featuring: MySite: customizable styles. AlwaysWork style Browser bug table covering all CSS2 with links to descriptions. Lists of > 1000 browser bugs Websafe Colorizer CSS2, CSS1 and HTML4 tutorials. CSS masterclass CSS2 test suite: 5000++ tests and 300+ test pages.
Received on Wednesday, 26 July 2000 05:19:43 UTC