- From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 18:00:59 -0400
- To: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- CC: RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
On 07/05/2010 03:39 PM, Shane McCarron wrote: > There is an editor's draft at > http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/drafts/2010/ED-rdfa-core-20100705 So, I passed this through the W3C validator and it passed! http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2010%2F02%2Frdfa%2Fdrafts%2F2010%2FED-rdfa-core-20100705%2F I wasn't expecting that to work... does it use the DTD that is specified at the top of the document? Is that why it worked? It also says that the DTD isn't a part of W3C's catalog - I guess it would only become part of W3C's catalog when the HTML5+RDFa spec goes to REC? In any case, seeing an HTML4.01 + RDFa 1.1 document validate is pretty cool. Great job, Shane! -- manu -- Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny) President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. blog: Myth Busting Web Stacks - PHP is Faster Than You Think http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2010/06/12/myth-busting-php/2/
Received on Monday, 5 July 2010 22:01:29 UTC