[whatwg] <noscript> should be allowed in <head>

Wed May 30 05:02:33 PDT 2007

Philip Taylor wrote:
> ...
> Perhaps it would be better to rephrase as: Will there be a conformance
> class for HTML5 consumers that process conforming documents according
> the spec, but process non-conforming documents in an undefined way?
> ...

Yep, that's what I had in mind.

> (I'm not sure whether it's that useful to be able to claim conformance
> for its own sake. Interoperability is useful, but maybe that can be
> achieved by imagining a new spec which just says "If a document is
> conforming according to the definition in HTML5, then it must be
> processed as described in HTML5, otherwise the document should be
> rejected but anything may happen" and all the tools can follow that,
> so there's no need for HTML5 itself to explicitly allow that.)
> 
>> > (Keep
>> > in mind that these consumers may not even have a DOM or a
>> > Javascript engine).
> 
> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work#non-scripted already
> defines UA conformance when there's no scripting, which seems to cover
> those cases.

Thinking of which, they may not even want to build a tree of the 
document. So how does the HTML5 parsing model help consumers that just 
want to consume a stream of tokens similarly to a Sax parser?

Best regards, Julian