Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #22105

Re: online gravitational field line explorer...

From "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>
Newsgroups comp.lang.javascript
Subject Re: online gravitational field line explorer...
Date 2013-11-21 22:52 +0200
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <l6lrpv$71v$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References (3 earlier) <6e3n89hek6ao71bgv0cb8p2f6c4q306oqr@4ax.com> <l6g6m5$n1g$1@dont-email.me> <famp899lfm3gd9kc9bm7a5ohfombc85r1a@4ax.com> <l6iqn5$jff$1@dont-email.me> <8lqs89h9dmomvtni0p8kaaumfn6b85me6s@4ax.com>

Show all headers | View raw

2013-11-21 22:19, John Harris wrote:

> The about-to-be standard for HTML5 says that every HTML5
> document has a doctype at the beginning,

That formal statement was not under dispute.

> Even then, the second case is only allowed if the document is being
> written by an out-of-date, "legacy", program.

You are just making this up. HTML5 CR clearly says that an obsolete 
doctype string is conforming (though not recommended). And this is just 
a formality. The real question was whether it actually matters which of 
the conforming doctypes you use. You are not saying anything about this, 
which is quite understandable. It is less understandable why you 
continue babbling about doctypes as if they ever meant in reality what 
they mean in SGML (naturally misunderstanding completely what they mean 
in SGML).

>> Now, to return to what was really being discussed, can you present any
>> evidence about the effect of using a legacy DOCTYPE vs. using <!DOCTYPE
>> html>, in *any* way (CSS, HTML, JavaScript, whatever)?
>
> This is irrelevant to the discussion,

That was the very question being discussed.

> but if you go to IE5 or
> thereabouts and do 'save as .mht file' for a page with a doc type of
> HTML 4.01 IE changed the doc type to HTML 4 as it didn't know about
> the later HTML version.

Now *that* is completely irrelevant to the question. Or you are saying 
that IE5 made some decisions differently depending on the presence of 
<!doctype html> vs. legacy doctypes?

>> In fact, to
>> really address the issue here, the evidence should be about support to
>> the <canvas> element. But first, *any* evidence?
>
> I think you'll find that NN4 didn't know what <canvas> meant.

So you are saying that NN4 made some decisions differently depending on 
the presence of <!doctype html> vs. legacy doctypes?

Or are you just not getting at all what the question is about? Let me 
remind you: it was the practical effects of using <!doctype html> vs. 
legacy doctypes. (There was a theoretical question mentioned too, but it 
was already solved: they are conforming.)

-- 
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/

Back to comp.lang.javascript | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

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