• From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@i...>
• To: "xml-dev@l... List" <xml-dev@l...>
• Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 15:38:49 -0800

On Dec 16, 2010, at 14:13, Liam R E Quin wrote:

> This <syntax /> came from SGML and was already legal in HTML from a
> formal standards perspective.

My understanding is that Annex K was added to SGML in late 1997 for the specific purpose of making XML 1.0 a subset of SGML. This was after HTML had been deployed.

Also, I believe no IETF or W3C HTML spec that pretends HTML to be an application of SGML actually enables the NET-enabled start tags.

Am I mistaken? 

-- 
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen@i...
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XMLisms and HTML parsing and modes (was: Re: XML5)
    • From: Liam R E Quin <liam@w...>
  • Re: XMLisms and HTML parsing and modes
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>

• References:
  • MicroXML
    • From: James Clark <jjc@j...>
  • Re: MicroXML
    • From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@i...>
  • XML5: Re: MicroXML
    • From: rjelliffe <rjelliffe@a...>
  • Re: XML5: Re: MicroXML
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>
  • Re: XML5: Re: MicroXML
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@i...>
  • Re: XML5: Re: MicroXML
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>
  • Re: XML5: Re: MicroXML
    • From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@i...>
  • Re: XML5: Re: MicroXML
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>
  • Re: XML5: Re: MicroXML
    • From: rjelliffe <rjelliffe@a...>
  • XMLisms and HTML parsing and modes (was: Re: XML5)
    • From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@i...>
  • Re: XMLisms and HTML parsing and modes (was: Re: XML5)
    • From: Liam R E Quin <liam@w...>