- From: Adam Kuehn <akuehn@nc.rr.com>
- Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 12:37:50 -0400
- To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, www-style@w3.org
Chris Lilley wrote: >In a fragment like this: > > <DIV> > Some text > <P>More text</P> > </DIV> > >the fragment is itself a well formed XML document, thus meeting the >minimum quality criteria. So unless I'm misunderstanding something, you are pretty much just saying, "Please close your tags, and use lower case more," is that about it? Doing that would seem to cover points 1 & 4 in your original post, would it not? I realize that I am presenting this in a very informal and non-technical way, and I certainly don't want to speak for Chris and the CDF WG, but doesn't that just about sum it up? Nobody expects a doctype for a bunch of three-line examples, right? So assuming that is a correct summary, is there some reason the CSS WG would be unwilling to make those relatively minor changes in the name of promoting careful authorship? (I take it for granted that most of the people reading this list would not leave an unclosed paragraph in their own code.) Ian has already responded that the CSS WG is unwilling to rework the examples to use other markup languages for fear of introducing unintended errors, so the only remaining issue would be placing the examples in a separate file. Just trying to distill things a little. -- -Adam Kuehn
Received on Friday, 26 August 2005 16:39:49 UTC