- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 15:57:44 -0600
- To: XHTML WG <public-xhtml2@w3.org>
- CC: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
(copying Benjamin since he is not on our mailing list).
Benjamin pointed out today that it is likely very difficult for people
reading our recommendations to know that we require XML 1.0 *only*. I
know this, and you all know this (probably), and a standards lawyer
reading XHTML M12N 1.0 / 1.1 and XHTML whatever might get there, but for
people writing XHTML documents this is not really explicitly stated
anywhere.
This arose because someone went and validated a document that had an xml
declaration that cited version 1.1. It validated just fine! But it
probably shouldn't. And at the very least, we should be explicit in our
conformance clauses that this is not a good thing.
I proposed the text like the following to Benjamin, and he seemed to
feel it might help:
"Note that all XHTML Family specifications, including this one,
are based upon XML 1.0. Conforming Documents that contain an
XML declaration MUST only reference version 1.0 in that XML
declaration. Conforming User Agents MUST support processing
as required by XML 1.0."
With suitable references to the conformance clauses and normative
references of XHTML M12N 1.1. Any objections to adding these simple
statements to our PERs? They have apparently not been published yet.
--
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, 26 January 2009 21:58:28 UTC