- From: fantasai <fantasai@escape.com>
- Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 01:36:56 -0400
- To: www-style@w3.org
(Referring to message from Jan Roland Eriksson to www-style dated Wed, 26 Jul 2000 19:35:04 +0200) A rather large part of your "line of reasoning" is based on the fact that RFC 1866 says that a user agent "should" assume an HTML2 doctype for text/html documents without one. I am saying that since you are taking that "should" with so much weight, why are you not giving equal weight to the "should" in the parsing instructions? You are picking out a specific "should" that you want Mozilla to follow; you /can/ choose to honor some "should"s and ignore others. Nowhere do I see a statement that says if you follow one "should", you are required to follow all other "should"s. The same goes for recommendations. If Mozilla chooses not to follow a certain "should", it is still a conforming user agent, (and whether "results" are "undesirable" is a matter of opinion, always). ~fantasai P.S. I really cannot follow your "line of reasoning". I mean, I can follow what you're trying to say regarding the superiority of RFC 1866's doctype assumption rule, but I don't see how it relates to the conclusion (the last two paragraphs).
Received on Thursday, 27 July 2000 01:36:27 UTC