- From: Brant Gurganus <brantgurganus2001@cherokeescouting.org>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 11:31:57 -0500
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: Jens Meiert <jens.meiert@erde3.com>, W3C CSS <www-style@w3.org>
Ian Hickson wrote: >On Thu, 6 Nov 2003, Jens Meiert wrote: > > >>I noticed two mistakes in the CSS2.1 Working Draft example in >>'Conformance: Requirements and Recommendations' [1]: One the one hand, >>the <head /> element is missing in the example's document source, but >>(correctly) listed in the document tree below. One the other hand, >>shouldn't the used Doctype comply with one of the valid DTD's you should >>normally use [2], e.g. with an HTML 4.01 Doctype? >> >> > >The <HEAD> element is optional in HTML4, and the DOCTYPE given in the >example is perfectly acceptable. > > Actually, I though the HEAD element was required, but its enclosing tags were optional. -- Brant Langer Gurganus http://www.rose-hulman.edu/~gurganbl
Received on Tuesday, 13 January 2004 11:32:39 UTC