W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html-editor@w3.org > July to September 2005

Re: Issue about XHTML 2.0

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 15:48:35 -0500
Message-ID: <42D6CFA3.6090102@aptest.com>
To: Sjoerd Visscher <sjoerd@w3future.com>
CC: Min Zhang <belemcheung@hotmail.com>, www-html-editor@w3.org

No - for some historical reasons the stuff is processed using a variety
of tools. We have considered using XSLT, but we have some production
requirements that are hard to model using those tools right now.

In this case the old pre was inside of a block that explicitly permits
embedded tags (mostly so we don't have to type &lt; all the time), so
the parser would never havae spotted it anyway. Basically, an example
element's contents are treated much like a script element's contents.

Sjoerd Visscher wrote:

>Shane McCarron wrote:
>>Thanks for pointing this out - it was indeed a typo. We have fixed it
>>for the next version.
>>For those of you interested, the HTML working group uses an extended
>>XHTML for source (xhtmldoc). This extended XHTML has an "example"
>>element, and in transitioning to it we accidently left in an old "pre"
>>element, which is how examples used to be coded in the source.
>Why don't you use a proper XML editor then?
>And how do you convert xhtmldoc to proper xhtml? Not with XSLT it seems,
>as the transformer would not have been able to parse the input XML file.

Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Thursday, 14 July 2005 20:48:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:08:54 UTC