However in order to bring it to a broader audience I’m asking for your suggestions here.
The general question is this: assuming no hints from the `--doctype` option and a missing `<!DOCTYPE html> declaration, should Tidy 5.0.0 assume that it is attempting to Tidy HTML5, or a previous version of HTML? Please consider that one of Tidy’s use cases is tidying/diagnosing “snippets” of HTML, such as with the `--body-only` option, and so it’s unsafe to assume that a doctype declaration will always be present.
The assumption for Tidy’s default behaviour affects validation, particularly for anchors surrounding block level elements. The example taken from the tracker above:
The future (and indeed the present) is HTML5, and at first this seems like a reasonable assumption to make. On the other hand making this assumptions can _seriously_ affect backwards compatibility for legacy HTML that still lacks legacy DTD’s.