W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xhtml2@w3.org > April 2009

Re: Chatter around titles

From: dorian taylor <dorian.taylor.lists@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 09:30:56 -0700
Message-ID: <fcd5649a0904110930l24a8fdacx4dfb6e316a6619e1@mail.gmail.com>
To: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Cc: public-xhtml2@w3.org

On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 8:33 AM, Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com> wrote:
> Thanks for your comments.
> As it turns out, the working group resolved recently to revert the content
> model of Meta back to its XHTML 1 form more or less, so there is no PCDATA
> nor Text permitted within meta.  Also, meta is no longer permitted in the
> body.  Consequently, we believe this particular item is no longer in
> conflict.

Thank you for your reply. I agree that it is wise to avoid constructs
that compete for semantics.

A distinct benefit I recognized of adding a content model to the meta
element was that I could describe, however narrowly, an XMLLiteral
triple without it being part of the body. Suppose, for example, I
wanted to describe a dc:abstract for the document that contained
markup, but for one reason or another I didn't want it to be
susceptible to rendering. Is that construct still available?


Dorian Taylor
Received on Saturday, 11 April 2009 16:31:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:30:31 UTC