W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > July to September 2000

Re: Publishing tool ideas for W3C editors

From: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 12:02:09 -0400
Message-ID: <39772281.9A71E2C9@w3.org>
To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
CC: spec-prod@w3.org
Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
> Well, XHTML would make a good common format I think. It is XML, and is
> therefore extensible through the use of namespaces (in spec if not in
> browsers...) and is renderable relatively widely.

The XHTML is not widely supported by the user agents for the moment. I
will disagree about making this format, the "offical format for
published W3C specifications".
XHTML is also too much extensible and will be used to express what
a common XML format can do better, without using tricks like class
attributes or anything.
On the other hand, we don't want to require the use of XML in order
to use the transformation tools, that's why we need to provide
an XSLT sheet to transform the document.

> And there are editing tools that are relatively easy to use, and transforming
> some kind of xml -> XHTML is not new for people who are currently
> transforming to HTML.

XHTML doesn't fulfil one of the requirements: being able to validate
the input format. For that, we will need to develop a special tool
when DTDs (and schemas) are designed for that.

Received on Thursday, 20 July 2000 12:02:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:42:15 UTC