Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #22146
| Message-ID | <2573646.tVgHbsfKGD@PointedEars.de> (permalink) |
|---|---|
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
| Organization | PointedEars Software (PES) |
| Date | 2013-11-22 20:06 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: online gravitational field line explorer... |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.javascript |
| References | (6 earlier) <l6iqn5$jff$1@dont-email.me> <8lqs89h9dmomvtni0p8kaaumfn6b85me6s@4ax.com> <m2mwkxh15u.fsf@nntp.bednarz.nl> <953v89ljd1s7c6kj54mu7fr1c4dsft6acb@4ax.com> <m2vbzkl42h.fsf@nntp.bednarz.nl> |
| Followup-To | comp.infosystems.www.authoring.misc |
Followups directed to: comp.infosystems.www.authoring.misc
This is off-topic here. F'up2 comp.infosystems.www.authoring.misc.
Eric Bednarz wrote:
> John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> writes:
>> Eric Bednarz<bednarz@fahr-zur-hoelle.org> wrote:
>>> John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> writes:
>>>> The legacy DOCTYPEs, by which I assume you mean SGML-like document
>>>> type declarations, say that the document is one of HTML 1 to 4.01.
>>> I don't know what you know about SGML, but I remember that you know
>>> OOP. Please write this 500.000 times:
>>> SGML document type declarations have no "is a" semantics.
>>
>> The HTML 4.01 standard
>
> If you are interested, I have a bridge for sale.
HTML 4.01 was published by the W3C after it took over HTML development from
the IETF/IESG [RFC2854]. The W3C works like an international
standardization organization. [W3CAbout] W3C Recommendations are called by
them (ibid.) and considered by many people “Web standards”:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML5#Standardization_process> pp.
>> says :
>> "A valid HTML document declares what version of HTML is used in the
>> document. The document type declaration names the document type
>> definition (DTD) in use for the document (see [ISO8879])."
>
> Yes, please, by all means, and let me emphasize that a bit, go
> ***SEE [ISO8879]***. It's a bloody normative reference, after all.
And the HTML 4.01 Specification, which had only achieved Recommendation
status in 1999 because it was formally approved by the W3C Director and
Membership [W3CProc], is not?
>> Sounds pretty "is_a" to me.
>
>
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.text.sgml/sMADjGyC0R4/gSoVLO495cMJ>
I think the fact that you have to borrow arguments from other people in
order to have an argument *at all* is indication that you have not thought
this through.
The argument made there is flawed in the first place because a *declaration*
is exactly that: a means to say (*declare*) “this is (supposed to be) a
$SOMETHING”. A *DOCTYPE* declaration says/declares “this is (supposed to
be) a $SOMETHING *document*”, a *document* of a certain *type*. The
syntactical restrictions thus enforced (and not enforced) implicitly define
the semantics (meaning) of the $SOMETHING; what the $SOMETHING *is*, what it
*means*. Hence DOCTYPE (Document *Type*) Declaration. A type is a
classification, a means to ascribe common properties to different objects.
The argument made there does not apply to HTML in particular because Valid
HTML, at least in version 4.01, *excludes* the SGML feature (internal
subset) that could put into doubt the intended type of a document.
See also:
<http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224/struct/global.html#h-7.2>
(contains the full text partially quoted above)
<http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224/appendix/notes.html#sgmlfeatures>
<http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/>
<http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#sec-prolog-dtd>
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/REC-xhtml1-20020801/#strict>
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-SVG11-20030114/struct.html#NewDocument>
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/REC-MathML3-20101021/appendixa.html#parsing.doctype>
etc.
This shows that a DOCTYPE declaration is in practice, at least for Web
documents, much more than just a hint or relevant to syntax. If the
declaration and the content does not match, you are asking for trouble.
Compare:
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/CR-html5-20130806/syntax.html#writing>
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/CR-html5-20130806/syntax.html#syntax-doctype>
> (Finding *anything* in Google Groups is an achievement well worth the
> George Cross, you owe me a drink.)
ACK.
__________
[W3CAbout] World Wide Web Consortium (2012). “About W3C”.
<http://www.w3.org/Consortium/>
[W3CProc] World Wide Web Consortium (2005-10-14). “World Wide Web
Consortium Process Document”. “7.4.5 Publication of a
W3C Recommendation”.
<http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#rec-publication>
[RFC2854] D. Connolly and L. Masinter (2000-06). “The 'text/html'
Media Type”. RFC 2854 (INFORMATIONAL). The Internet Society.
<http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2854.txt>
--
PointedEars
Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
Back to comp.lang.javascript | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
online gravitational field line explorer... "Chris M. Thomasson" <no@spam.invalid> - 2013-11-18 20:17 -0800
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... "Chris M. Thomasson" <no@spam.invalid> - 2013-11-18 23:21 -0800
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... "Evertjan." <exjxw.hannivoort@interxnl.net> - 2013-11-19 09:36 +0000
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2013-11-19 12:10 +0200
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... "Evertjan." <exjxw.hannivoort@interxnl.net> - 2013-11-19 11:01 +0000
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2013-11-19 13:33 +0200
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2013-11-19 07:44 -0800
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-11-19 16:53 +0100
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... "Chris M. Thomasson" <no@spam.invalid> - 2013-11-19 12:03 -0800
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-11-19 16:11 +0000
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2013-11-19 19:21 +0200
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-11-20 15:48 +0000
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2013-11-20 19:15 +0200
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-11-21 20:19 +0000
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2013-11-21 22:52 +0200
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-11-22 17:33 +0000
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2013-11-22 19:50 +0200
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-11-23 14:17 +0000
Dollar sign in identifier names (was: online gravitational field line explorer...) Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-11-22 19:49 +0100
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... Eric Bednarz <bednarz@fahr-zur-hoelle.org> - 2013-11-21 22:53 +0100
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-11-21 23:25 +0100
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-11-22 16:57 +0000
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2013-11-22 19:12 +0200
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-11-22 19:00 +0100
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2013-11-22 21:04 +0200
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-11-22 23:46 +0100
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... Eric Bednarz <bednarz@fahr-zur-hoelle.org> - 2013-11-23 01:21 +0100
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... Eric Bednarz <bednarz@fahr-zur-hoelle.org> - 2013-11-22 18:49 +0100
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-11-22 20:06 +0100
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... Eric Bednarz <bednarz@fahr-zur-hoelle.org> - 2013-11-22 22:49 +0100
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-11-22 23:52 +0100
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... Eric Bednarz <bednarz@fahr-zur-hoelle.org> - 2013-11-23 01:40 +0100
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... "Chris M. Thomasson" <no@spam.invalid> - 2013-11-19 12:05 -0800
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... Tiger Sharktopus <tigersharktopus@gmail.com> - 2013-11-19 15:54 -0800
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... "Chris M. Thomasson" <no@spam.invalid> - 2013-11-21 06:17 -0800
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-11-20 19:47 +0000
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2013-11-20 17:43 -0800
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... "Chris M. Thomasson" <no@spam.invalid> - 2013-11-21 06:58 -0800
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... "Chris M. Thomasson" <no@spam.invalid> - 2013-11-22 12:56 -0800
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-11-23 18:15 +0000
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... "Chris M. Thomasson" <no@spam.invalid> - 2013-11-24 13:38 -0800
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-11-25 20:47 +0000
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... "Chris M. Thomasson" <no@spam.invalid> - 2013-11-25 19:51 -0800
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-11-27 20:36 +0000
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... "Chris M. Thomasson" <no@spam.invalid> - 2013-11-29 20:56 -0800
Re: online gravitational field line explorer... "Chris M. Thomasson" <no@spam.invalid> - 2013-12-01 19:28 -0800
csiph-web