- From: Paul McKeown (Tiscali) <ppjmckeown@tiscali.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2009 17:22:27 +0100
- To: Douglas Perreault CPA* CITP <doug@perreault.us>
- CC: 'www-validator-css ML' <www-validator-css@w3.org>
Douglas, .... and of course html 6 will reverse this decision when the wise men of this world decide it should implement something fundamentally incompatible with html 5. [This is not a general criticism of html 5, which is, of course, generally excellent, if at least 5 years too late.] Back in the real world of dealing with incompatible browsers and standards, it would be nice if the css validator allowed one the option of toggling off errors/warning for -moz, -khtml, &c and the html validator gave one the converse toggle of generating warnings for MS conditional comments if one objected to them. A little bit more control, a whole world of benefit. Anyway, enough philosophy for now, Regards, Aristotle, er, sorry, Paul McKeown (I must wake up!) Douglas Perreault CPA* CITP wrote: > Re the below quote from Paul. Excellent question! It would be nice if we had > better control over these things. It's my understanding, though, that HTML > is going the way of CSS, not the other way around. In HTML 5, the doctype > will simply be written as <!DOCTYPE html>. > > --Doug > > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul McKeown > Sent: Monday, April 06, 2009 10:57 AM > > > In a way there is a philosophical issue at stake here - why is that CSS > does not provide a "csstype" or "ccsversion" indicator similar to html's > doctype to allow a browser to vary its styling depending on what the > author wished for. > > > > >
Received on Monday, 6 April 2009 16:23:47 UTC