Previous Topic
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view


Anne van Kesteren-2

Disclaimer: my own opinion and all.

On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 11:43:13 +0100, liorean <[hidden email]> wrote:
> The WHAT WG stance on validation seems to be that you should choose
> which standard to validate against in the validator. The solution to
> the problem of the W3C validator using HTML4.01 as default for
> "<!DOCTYPE HTML>" would be corrected by choosing the appropriate
> standard when you validate.

As far as the WHATWG has a stance I like to think it's a little different  
on this subject :-) I think it's more that documents should evolve with  
standards just like browsers evolve with newer standards. This does mean  
that if we make a backwards incompatible change with respect to document  
conformance in HTML6 we better have a pretty good reason for it.

(The reason we're breaking with HTML4 is that the HTML4 specification is  
not aligned with either deployed content reality or browser reality. Full  
SGML syntax is has never been supported for instance so it is reasonable  
to break with that in HTML5. One of HTML5's "exit requirements" is that we  
have two implementations so HTML5 is also a lot less likely to exhibit the  
problem HTML4 had, which did not have such requirements. Which in turn  
means that it's unlikely HTML6 will have to break with HTML5, etc.)

Anne van Kesteren