- From: Ineke van der Maat <inekemaa@xs4all.nl>
- Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2002 10:52:31 +0200
- To: "Bill Mason" <w3c@accessibleinter.net>, <public-evangelist@w3.org>
Hello Bill, > You're missing an important point in the note. The note clearly states > that if the HTML Compatibility Guidelines of the XHTML 1.0 spec are met, > then XHTML 1.0 may be served as text/html: No I was not something missing, but I made the difference between XHTML 1.0 strict and XHTML 1.0 transitional/frames . I wrote only about XHTML 1.0 strict, as in this specs e.g in the img element vspace and hspace are not allowed. In XHTML 1.0 transitional these vspace and hspace attributes are allowed as in HTML. I also should serve for that reason XHTML 1.0 transitional as text/html but not XHTML 1.0 strict. As you know is XHTML 1.0 not existing ( XHTML 1.0 has 3 DTDs: strict, frames and transitional), while only XHTML 1.1 exists. The text in the note is something confusing I think (it speaks only about XHTML 1.0 as you do) . That makes the difference in my eyes. XHTML 1.0 strict is not totally compatible with HTML as XHTML 1.0 transitional is. The differences between XHTML 1.0 strict and XHTML 1.1 are very little. Only the lang attribute has been removed from all elements (is replaced by xml:lang) and the name attribute is replaced in some elements as in <a> by only id. Greetings Ineke
Received on Sunday, 1 September 2002 04:45:24 UTC