- From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 09:43:51 -0700
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Cc: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>, Jonathan Kew <jfkthame@gmail.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
> On Jun 29, 2014, at 4:56 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote: > >> On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp> wrote: >> By the way, my personal +1 is to Brad. > > Could you elaborate a bit on why you agree? We render U+FFFD for > instance (and not doing so would be bad). Why would we want to hide > other code points that could potentially indicate something went > wrong? Speaking for myself I don't think it is our purview (or should be) to intentionally break the rendering of Web pages, however laudable you might think the reason is. We should be be prioritizing intended rendering, not educating through such a blunt weapon. I think the way text/html is forgiving of unclosed tags and unquoted attributes and so on is a better model for how we should deal with these sort of problems. Be forgiving, don't degrade legacy content.
Received on Sunday, 29 June 2014 16:44:20 UTC