- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2008 01:16:16 +0200
- To: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Smylers wrote: > Michael(tm) Smith writes: > >> - Instead of "XSLT-compat" or some other arbitrary string, why >> not just require that it just be the empty string? ... we would >> want the value to be empty, not some standard value that would >> become a de facto public ID and that apps would lead to the same >> very real "bogus rationalizations about its purpose" problem that >> Henri describes. > > I'd've thought exactly the opposite: "XSLT-compat" is somewhat > self-documenting, indicating that this is XSLT-compatible HTML. Whereas > "PUBLIC ''" is a cryptic bit of boilerplate with no obvious purpse -- > which could therefore lead to the fears Henri mentioned, of people > thinking it's needed for reasons other than XSLT compatibility and > including it unnecessarily. 1) "XSLT-compat" is a bit misleading, because it may be relevant to other producers as well. 2) On the other hand, I don't see how anybody would think that "PUBLIC ''" is somehow "more correct" than the minimal version. BR, Julian
Received on Friday, 29 August 2008 23:17:01 UTC