- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2005 13:28:21 +0300
- To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Cc: W3C Style List <www-style@w3.org>
On Aug 26, 2005, at 21:29, Chris Lilley wrote: > Thank you. If the fragments are stated in the spec to be legal SGML > Text > Entities then that would be satisfactory, although I am only aware of > one CSS-enabled browser that uses an SGML parser. FWIW, I agree with Hixie. Using extracts in examples is perfectly reasonable and changing the examples would be a waste of time incurring an unwanted opportunity cost (keeping the WG members from working on something more useful). Would you be satisfied if the spec stated the obvious and said that some examples are extracts? > I would be surprised if XHTML 2 requires a DOCTYPE declaration. You are not the only one who'd be surprised. http://copia.ogbuji.net/blog/2005-08-10/Today_s_XM -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Saturday, 27 August 2005 10:28:27 UTC