W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xhtml2@w3.org > May 2008

Re: XHTML MIME draft updated for review

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 15:48:21 -0500
Message-ID: <4828AD15.8010502@aptest.com>
To: Roland Merrick <roland_merrick@uk.ibm.com>
CC: public-xhtml2@w3.org

Comments below:

Roland Merrick wrote:
> Greetings Shane, a few comments . . .
> Only looking at Appendix A. Compatibility Guidelines [1]
> This appendix summarizes design guidelines for authors who wish their 
> XHTML documents to render on both XHTML-aware and <span>modern HTML 
> user agents</span>.
> Rationale: Some <span>legacy user agents</span> . . .
> items within span should be reconciled, "legacy" is often considered 
> pejorative so lets stick to HTML user agent.
I agree that we should remove legacy.  We do need to say "modern" or 
some equivalent somewhere tho.  These guidelines will not work well on 
OLD HTML user agents, regardless (e.g. you cannot use ID as an anchor in 
IE 4).
> so for XHTML 1.1 it should start . . .
>   <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN" 
> "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd">
>   <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
>     <head>
I don't understand this comment, sorry.  What's the context?
> A.2. Empty Elements
>   as was the case with "A.10. Boolean Attributes", I would suggest 
> that we enumerate the set of elements affected.
>   The list is not too long and is something like: base; meta; link; 
> hr; br; basefont; param; img; area; input; isindex; col.
We can include a list, but remember that it will necessarily be wrong.  
We are talking about the ever expanding XHTML family, and we are adding 
elements all the time, and some might have an empty content model (e.g. 
access in XHTML Access).
> A.7. The lang and xml:lang Attributes
>   says: DO use xml:lang
>   implies to me: DO NOT use lang
> A.8. Fragment Identifiers
>   says: DO use the id attribute
>   implies to me: DO NOT use the name attribute
> A.9. Character Encoding
> says: DO set the character encoding for a document via the charset 
> parameter of the HTTP Content-Type header.
> sounds good.
> says: When this is not possible, . . .
> hmmm. . .
Well, sometimes you do not have access to the server.  Also, for 
documents that are server locally (file: scheme) there is no header to set.
> A.10. Boolean Attributes
>   says: DO use the full form for boolean attributes
>   implies to me: DO NOT use compact form for boolean attributes
>   I think it would be useful to retain the enumerated set of 
> attributes that are involved and described in the original text.
The list is not exhaustive.  I am happy to keep it if you like, but we 
need to make it clear that it is a subset of an ever expanding collection.
> A.12. Using Ampersands in Attribute Values (and Elsewhere)
>   (and Elsewhere) refers to . . . ?
> A.13. Cascading Style Sheets (CSS) and XHTML
>   and XHTML ?
>   this section is too terse and definately needs sime supporting 
> examples to illustrate good practice.
I am (sadly) not an expert on what would constitute good practice in 
this case.  Can you or someone suggest examples?
> A.16. The Named Character Reference &apos;
>   since we are specific about this I infer that it is the only such 
> example.
It is.
> Not mentioned. . .
> do we need to make any distinctions between serving XHTML 1.0 and 
> XHTML 1.1? My suspicion is that we do.
No - I have intentionally made this generic since it needs to apply to 
all XHTML family markup languages.
> My earlier comments on the last draft [2] and [3] still largely apply.
> [1] http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-xhtmlmime-20080423/#compatGuidelines
> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Apr/0015.html
I have addressed the comment in this message.
> [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2008Apr/0016.html
I added an example document in an appendix.  This will need more work.

> Regards, Roland

Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Monday, 12 May 2008 20:49:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:30:30 UTC