W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-geo@w3.org > July 2005

Re: New FAQ: entities and NCRs

From: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 11:15:20 +0900
Message-Id: <>
To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Cc: public-i18n-geo@w3.org

At 06:24 05/07/02, Chris Lilley wrote:
 >On Friday, July 1, 2005, 10:59:14 PM, Bjoern wrote:
 >BH> * Chris Lilley wrote:
 >>>BH>  the HTML Working Group so far
 >>>BH> refused to provide such clarification,
 >>>The XML spec seems fairly clear on that point
 >BH> The XML 1.0 Recommendation does not define requirements for XHTML user
 >BH> agents unless you consider normative references to XML 1.0 in the XHTML
 >BH> 1.0 Recommendation. The reference to XML 1.0 in XHTML 1.0 is neither
 >BH> normative nor clear.
 >Thanks for pointing this out. It seems like a bug, that the reference to
 >XML is not normative. In particular, it seems that an erratum should be
 >issued mking it a normative reference, and this rolled into any
 >subsequent edition.

Yes indeed. In fact, XML 1.0 is normatively referenced, it's just
the text in the reference section that for some reason is declared
as informative. For example, look at
http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/REC-xhtml1-20020801/#uaconf. It starts:

3.2. User Agent Conformance

A conforming user agent must meet all of the following criteria:
In order to be consistent with the XML 1.0 Recommendation [XML], the user 
agent must parse and evaluate an XHTML document for well-formedness. If the 
user agent claims to be a validating user agent, it must also validate 
documents against their referenced DTDs according to [XML].

That seems clear enough to me. It's definitely a very clear expression
of intent, and it's a normative reference to XML 1.0.

Regards,    Martin.

P.S.: I'm still sometimes thinking back to the old days when most discussions
       were about new ideas and real functionality rather than about (to most,
       or so I hope) pretty obvious little oversights that should not
       detract from the main intent of the spec (of course, they should
       be fixed anyway). 
Received on Tuesday, 5 July 2005 04:57:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:28:03 UTC