On Aug 12, 2005, at 13:32, Robin Berjon wrote:
> Henri Sivonen wrote:
>> On Aug 11, 2005, at 20:29, Robin Berjon wrote:
>>> Mandatory DTD can be up for discussion given how it's been used in
>>> the past for quirks mode detection and the such, but for sure if
>>> there's any way to do without it, I sure won't mind.
>> Of course, the doctype sniffing argument is and should be totally
>> moot when it comes to XHTML 2.0.
>
> I would tend to agree, the reason I'm doubting is because I don't see
> why instead of this ghastly and verbose notion of using the DTD to
> sniff the mode they didn't just come up with a "beStrictBaby="true"
> attribute on the root element for when you want standard compliance.
For HTML 4, doctype sniffing was devised after the spec was frozen as a
way to read tea leaves.
For XHTML 2.0, there should be no quirks mode. Therefore, it should
always be beStrictBaby="true". No sniffing needed. No doctype needed.
--
Henri Sivonen
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
