W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html-editor@w3.org > April to June 2003

Comments about XHTML 2.0 WD5

From: Keith Bowes <w3list@zooplah.dyndns.org>
Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 15:43:36 -0400
Message-ID: <3EBAB368.40408@zooplah.dyndns.org>
To: www-html-editor@w3.org

I have compiled a list of comments, suggestions, possible errors, and 
queries that I thought of as I was reading the new WD.  I hope that 
nothing I write is inappropriate, and I apologize if some of these 
things are too clueless.

SECTION 5.5
LinkTypes
1. Shouldn't link types be case-sensitive (lower case)?
2. What's with the type of "stylesheet"?  The XHTML Media Types Note says,
    "When serving an XHTML document with [the application/xhtml+xml] 
media type,
    authors SHOULD include the XML stylesheet processing instruction
    [XMLstyle] to associate style sheets." and in section 1.1.3 of the 
XHTML WD,
    it says "if a facility exists in XML, try to use that rather than
    duplicating it."  So with those things in mind, shouldn't
    <?xml-stylesheet ... ?> be the recommended method?
3. Isn't a type of "redirect" contrary to WCAG, which says not to use 
client-
    side redirects?

SECTION 6.1
"title"
1. Same as SECTION 5.5:LinkTypes:2.

SECTION 6.4
"edit"
1. Should there be more information about the edit?  For example,
    edit="changed" might be complemented by, for example,
    edited-from="old-text", or maybe edit="moved" might have some way to
    indicate the old position (via id?)?

SECTION 6.8
1. Shouldn't the definition be:
    defaultAction = "cancel|perform"
    (with quotes)?

SECTION 7
1. With backwards compatibility thrown out, should the root element now be
    <xhtml> or something?

SECTION 9.7
1. Shouldn't the code example use <blockcode> instead of <p> (especially 
being
    that it's not a paragraph)?

SECTION 11.1
1. Should "definition list" be renamed to something more descriptive of how
    it's used?  Maybe "associative list" would be a better choice:
      <al>
        <ak>term...</ak>
        <av>Definition</av>
      </al>
      [al = "associative list", ak = "associative-list key", av = 
"associative-
       list value"]

SECTION 11.3
1. Shouldn't all applicable browsers number ordered-list item (e.g, speaking
    browsers would take <ol><li>Apples</li></ol> and perhaps say
    <em>1</em> {pause} Apples)?

SECTION 12.1.3
1. Shouldn't example three use type="application/xhtml+xml" since, 
presumably,
    it's an XHTML 2.0 document?

SECTION 14.1.2
1. Is that thing about sharing frame data supposed to be there, or was 
it just
    copied from HTML 4?

SECTION 16.1
1. <noscript> for some reason still feels inadequate in cases where <script>
    and its corresponding <noscript> are at different places on the 
page.  So,
    maybe noscript could have a for attribute:
      for = IDREF
    The basic scenario is the use of different scripting languages, making
    heuristics of when to display the contents a bit inaccurate.

SECTION 16.2
1. Shouldn't "this boolean attribute makes the current object element a
    declaration only" be "this boolean attribute makes the current script
    element a declaration only"?

SECTION 16.2.3
1. The document says that the first script is "text/vbscript" but the 
example
    shows that it's "text/x-vbscript".  Is this intentional?

SECTION 18.*
1. There needs to be some elaboration.  What does src do for <style>?  Does
    it load a stylesheet from an external resource?  If it does, then
    shouldn't it be possible to nest alternative style languages?

SECTION 18.1.3
1. Same as SECTION 5.5:LinkTypes:2.

SECTION 19.2
1.  Shouldn't the text (near the bottom) "regardless of the of the defined
     values within the col eleemnts" be "regardless of the defined
     values within the col elements"?
Received on Thursday, 8 May 2003 15:48:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:17:44 GMT