W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > October 2008

Re: Treatment of RDFa in TAG Finding on Self-describing Web and feed back on RDFa in XHTML1.1

From: Dean Edridge <dean@dean.org.nz>
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 01:35:35 +1300
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com, www-tag@w3.org, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>, Ben Adida <ben@mit.edu>
Message-id: <48EDFA97.6080001@dean.org.nz>

Julian Reschke wrote:
>
> Dean Edridge wrote:
>> ...
>> Since Steven Pemberton is the HTML Activity Lead, surely he must have 
>> read the HTML5 spec and known that the XHTML variant of HTML5 was 
>> identified by the mime type and namespace and not by any doctype. 
>> There needs to be some sort of identification so that any (X)HTML5 
>> documents are not confused with XHTML1.x documents. Up until now it's 
>> been fine since all XHTML1.x specs have used a doctype, now that it's 
>> been noticed that the XHTML variant of HTML5 doesn't use a doctype, 
>> another WG decides to copy that idea and create problems.
>> ...
>
> I *strongly* disagree with this opinion. If the only method to 
> "understand" the meaning of an HTML (or XML) tag is to check the doc 
> type, we are in deep trouble. 

I'm not saying that it is the *only* way to identify a document. And I 
never mentioned "understand". I never said any of that :)

If the W3C_Validator sees a document with a XHTML1.x doctype it would 
validate it against XHTML1.1+RDFa conformance criteria. If it sees a 
document being sent as application/xhtml+xml with no doctype it can pass 
it over to the Validator.nu/HTML5-facet part of the W3C_Validator and 
the HTML5 feature would check it to see if it is a valid XHTML variant 
of HTML5 document, just like it does today with HTML5 documents that 
contain the HTML5 doctype.

I'm not sure what it is that you're referring to.

> Many tools never will see the doc type (such as XSLT), and the 
> association will be broken as soon as document fragments are copied 
> into other documents.
>
> BR, Julian
>

I don't see how your comment is related to what I have requested.

-- 
Dean Edridge
Received on Thursday, 9 October 2008 12:36:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 9 October 2008 12:36:10 GMT