On Fri, 21 Feb 2014 14:40:44 +0100
Eckehard Berns <ecki-suckless_AT_ecki.to> wrote:
> I see why you wish for a stricter approach. I don't believe this will
> happen anytime soon.
It's already happening! Everyone can choose for himself ;).
> I'm not sure about that. SGML has DTDs that describe what you're allowed
> to do and what not. So in theory browsers could reject non-validating
> HTML pages as well. No need to switch to XML for that. But I would doubt
> that browsers would do this.
In theory they could, and that would be conforming behaviour, but the
reality looks different.
> Not bad for the web. Bad for me! :) I write lots of HTML at work. I tend
> to write validating HTML usually - except when encountering features
> that can't be described with valid HTML (HTML5 fixes this thou, at least
> for me). If I had to write XHTML I would get very angry pretty fast.
Yes, that depends on personal taste.
Just like people who are too lazy to comment their code, I see it as
laziness when people don't check the well-formedness of their markup.
Don't take it as an insult, it's everybody's freedom after all. But you
need to ask what's favorable for everyone.
> As said before, browsers could reject non-validating HTML as well.
They could but sadly don't. There are good reasons for this, because
the web developed this way, but I like the secondary perspective ;).
> So in the end we disagree because of personal preference. That's fine
> with me.
Everybody is free to do what he likes.
Cheers
FRIGN
--
FRIGN <dev_AT_frign.de>
Received on Fri Feb 21 2014 - 13:45:00 CET