- From: David Dorward <david@dorward.me.uk>
- Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 14:17:19 +0000
- To: Cecil Ward <cecil@cecilward.com>
- Cc: <www-validator@w3.org>
On 1 Mar 2010, at 13:18, Cecil Ward wrote: > but are you guys aware of whether the above is set in stone now for XHTML5? Nothing is really set in stone until it becomes a recommendation. > This seems an unfortunate "must", as requiring XHTML users to reformat > content and serve it selectively from servers (rather than just being able > to use an XHTML 1.0-BC style mechanism with only http headers changing > according to UA capabilities) seems a real pity, a hassle with no real > benefit. That still does more harm then good. > If it is not yet set in stone, can mere mortals express their vote? How? Join the working group. http://www.w3.org/html/wg/ > I assume that if you always use only UTF8 then it's a non-issue anyway, as > no declaration is the reqd as it's the default. Is that right? Oh, would that be so simple. http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/syntax.html#determining-the-character-encoding -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk
Received on Monday, 1 March 2010 14:17:58 UTC