- From: Innovimax W3C <innovimax+w3c@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 20:42:09 +0200
- To: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Cc: XHTML WG <public-xhtml2@w3.org>
Shane, Please find a small clarification of 8416 Again here the legitimate side question is Are we allowed to use XHTML specification in a XML 1.1 document ? And I think the answer is "no" because * As you pointed out, only XML 1.0 is normatively referenced * And because in 3.2. User Agent Conformance / 9th bullet states that the white space are the one of XML 1.0 explicitely in the spec Regards, Mohamed On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 8:10 PM, Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com> wrote: > I have done a pass over the XHTML 1.0 Second Edition issues in the tracking > system and made recommendations as to how to deal with them. Most of them > are overcome by events as Appendix C has been removed from the > specification. > I have collected the issues together in a document at > http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2009/xhtml1-issues-20090525.html - please spend > some time looking at it. > > There are some additional issues that arose as the result of our PER > submission. I feel like we should try to capture those issues in the system > and address them before we restart PER. Any objections? > > -- > Shane P. McCarron Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120 > Managing Director Fax: +1 763 786-8180 > ApTest Minnesota Inet: shane@aptest.com > > > > -- Innovimax SARL Consulting, Training & XML Development 9, impasse des Orteaux 75020 Paris Tel : +33 9 52 475787 Fax : +33 1 4356 1746 http://www.innovimax.fr RCS Paris 488.018.631 SARL au capital de 10.000 €
Received on Monday, 25 May 2009 18:42:45 UTC