On Sat, 10 Mar 2007 02:28:32 +0100, Billy Wong [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Indeed. IMO, global |href| gives nothing but more confusion. If we
want to have hyperlinks on block-level elements, it is simpler just
let a and/or other inline elements be legal to wrap block-level
elements.
Yup. If I
Le Sat, 10 Mar 2007 00:46:15 +0200, Alexey Feldgendler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit:
On Fri, 09 Mar 2007 21:53:09 +0100, Asbjørn Ulsberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is a plain simple yet brilliant idea.
Thanks. :)
I'm sad there aren't more replies to this wonderful idea, though! :-P
On Mar 10, 2007, at 11:16 AM, Mihai Sucan wrote:
Le Sat, 10 Mar 2007 00:46:15 +0200, Alexey Feldgendler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit:
On Fri, 09 Mar 2007 21:53:09 +0100, Asbjørn Ulsberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is a plain simple yet brilliant idea.
Thanks. :)
I'm sad there aren't
Alexey Feldgendler wrote:
There would be replies if your idea was incomplete or controversial, but
actually it seems like everyone
agrees. What worries me is whether there is a chance that Microsoft
actually does what's
suggested (and whether someone in Microsoft who is in position to
On Sat, 10 Mar 2007 11:16:09 +0100, Mihai Sucan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Alexey, actually I'm skeptical about this. First impression I had
reading the first post was hey, do we need yet another switch?. What's
super-duper standards mode after all?
How will tutorials look:
1. For quirks
Le Sat, 10 Mar 2007 14:27:32 +0200, Alexey Feldgendler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit:
On Sat, 10 Mar 2007 11:16:09 +0100, Mihai Sucan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Alexey, actually I'm skeptical about this. First impression I had
reading the first post was hey, do we need yet another switch?.
Alexey Feldgendler wrote:
The tutorials will just say Use !DOCTYPE html.
What are those of us who wish to use XML tools on our documents supposed
to use? We will need a real DTD at some point, to declare the entities
if nothing else. We will not be able to use !DOCTYPE html.
Possibly
On 10 Mar 2007, at 13:43, Elliotte Harold wrote:
Alexey Feldgendler wrote:
The tutorials will just say Use !DOCTYPE html.
What are those of us who wish to use XML tools on our documents
supposed to use? We will need a real DTD at some point, to declare
the entities if nothing else. We
On Sat, 10 Mar 2007 14:43:44 +0100, Elliotte Harold
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alexey Feldgendler wrote:
The tutorials will just say Use !DOCTYPE html.
What are those of us who wish to use XML tools on our documents supposed
to use? We will need a real DTD at some point, to declare the
Geoffrey Sneddon wrote:
Then you're still relying on the UA reading the DTD, which it doesn't
have to. What use is a DTD if it doesn't need to be read and has no
nominative value?
It's my user agent and it will read the DTD. One more time:
It's not just browsers out there!
Browsers that
Simon Pieters wrote:
Why would you need to declare entities, though?
If you don't define entities, then the parser can't resolve them. This
is for entities such as copy; and trade;. There are only five entities
that XML parsers recognize out of the box without a DTD: amp;, lt;,
gt;, apos;,
Le Sat, 10 Mar 2007 12:39:46 +0200, Jorgen Horstink
[EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit:
On Mar 10, 2007, at 11:16 AM, Mihai Sucan wrote:
Adding a new DOCTYPE switch is not a solution to Microsoft's problem.
As far as I understand it, the new DOCTYPE switch is meant to 'tell' to
browser the
The reason why I haven't updated the software at http://
hsivonen.iki.fi/validator/html5/ lately is that I have been writing
about it.
The draft of my master's thesis is available for commenting at:
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/thesis/
I'd appreciate comments on the draft. However, I won't be able
On Mar 10, 2007, at 15:43, Elliotte Harold wrote:
Alexey Feldgendler wrote:
The tutorials will just say Use !DOCTYPE html.
What are those of us who wish to use XML tools on our documents
supposed to use?
!DOCTYPE html if you are using XML tools with an HTML5 parser.
No doctype if you
On 3/10/07, Mihai Sucan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
actually I'm skeptical about this. First impression I had reading
the first post was hey, do we need yet another switch?. What's
super-duper standards mode after all?
From
Le Sat, 10 Mar 2007 22:21:11 +0200, Shadow2531 [EMAIL PROTECTED] a
écrit:
On 3/10/07, Mihai Sucan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
actually I'm skeptical about this. First impression I had reading
the first post was hey, do we need yet another switch?. What's
super-duper standards mode after all?
On 3/10/07, Mihai Sucan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Le Sat, 10 Mar 2007 22:21:11 +0200, Shadow2531 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It seems that even in standards mode, people expect some quirky
behavior and MS wants to retain the quirkyness even in standards mode.
If they continue to fix standards mode,
Henri,
Here are few remarks
In RELAX NG Datatyping
Why is there no mention to DTLL of the DSDL ?
For sake of completeness
In Schematron
You should mention that XML Schema 1.1 which is still a WD try to add
assertion too
Liam Quin (with only one n)
[[
common.inner.strict-inline =
( text )
]]
- Original Message -
From: Anne van Kesteren [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Billy Wong [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: WHATWG [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2007 12:32 AM
Subject: Re: [whatwg] href attribute
On Sat, 10 Mar 2007 02:28:32 +0100, Billy Wong [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Indeed.
On Saturday 2007-03-10 23:41 +0100, mozer wrote:
Liam Quin (with only one n)
No, Liam Quin [1] and Liam Quinn [2] are two different Canadian
members of the Web standards community, and should not be confused
with each other. The latter was responsible for the WDG HTML
Validator, so Henri's
On Mar 10, 2007, at 8:38 AM, Mihai Sucan wrote:
There's no way to advertise the document as HTML 5, and it's
certainly not the purpose of the specification to do so.
This is a problem. It is especially a problem now that the W3C is
working on their version of HTML 5. When I asked Ian
Forgot to change the name in my account settings from WHATWG to
Robert Brodrecht. Fixed for future reference.
Sorry for any confusion.
Matthew Ratzloff wrote:
Relying on headers is a good way to get people to ignore that part of the
specification. Web designers don't want to worry about headers and
.htaccess files. It has to be syntactic.
I think expecting the mass of web designers to worry about doctypes
isn't much less
- Original Message -
From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2007 4:53 PM
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Using the HTML5 DOCTYPE as a new quirksmode switch
Matthew Ratzloff wrote:
Relying on headers is a good way to
Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
Back to basics:
A hyperlink is a relationship between two anchors,
called the head and the tail of the hyperlink[DEXTER]. [1]
This is not a definition of the a element. In fact, a is defined
as a anchor, not a hyperlink.
By contrast, the |href| attribute
On 10/03/2007 02:28, Billy Wong wrote:
On 3/6/07, Matthew Raymond [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To me, the only advantage of a global |href| is that you can use it
on block-level elements, and I don't see why a block-level version of
a couldn't fill the same use case.
Indeed. IMO, global
On Mar 10, 2007, at 4:37 PM, Matthew Ratzloff wrote:
The seem to serve the purpose. If there are two HTML 5
specifications,
browser makers can come together to decide which one to support by
default
when no DOCTYPE is present. Developers who would prefer the alternate
standard could use
On Mar 10, 2007, at 5:24 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
And yet: web server configuration of headers is not always available.
Public virtual site hosts is a good example.
And more:
Server adminestering and content creation are different roles/
activities.
As a rule different people handle
- Original Message -
From: Matthew Raymond [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Andrew Fedoniouk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: WHATWG [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2007 7:17 PM
Subject: Re: [whatwg] href attribute
Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
Back to basics:
A hyperlink is a relationship
On 11/03/2007 05:59, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
In any case not all a's are hyperlinks so for your meaning of semantic
they should also not be automatically hyperlinks (or anchors if you wish).
I am pretty sure that existence of 'href' attribute is what creates
semantic meaning of a for you. So
I don't care about DTD, but DOCTYPE is established, so it seems strange to
trash it in favor of something new when the benefit is questionable (as
far as I can tell). It is also evident to me that there needs to be some
kind of versioning--consistent rendering shouldn't be a moving target.
If
On Mar 10, 2007, at 9:40 PM, Matthew Ratzloff wrote:
I don't care about DTD, but DOCTYPE is established, so it seems
strange to
trash it in favor of something new when the benefit is questionable
(as
far as I can tell).
I don't think anyone wants to trash the DOCTYPE in light of the
- Original Message -
From: Robert Brodrecht
To: Andrew Fedoniouk
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2007 8:36 PM
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Using the HTML5 DOCTYPE as a new quirksmode switch
On Mar 10, 2007, at 5:24 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
And yet: web server
33 matches
Mail list logo
