W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html-editor@w3.org > January to March 2011

Re: Link to xhtml-datatypes-1.mod broken in XHTML Basic 1.1 and XHTML 1.1 DTDs

From: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 20:02:57 +0100
Message-ID: <4D221D61.6030205@w3.org>
To: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
CC: www-html-editor@w3.org
I haven't checked the W3C markup validation service, but I'm pretty sure it already uses a local copy of the DTDs. The W3C mobileOK Checker also uses a local catalog but the mapping is "simple": it merely converts well-known prefixes to local folders. For instance, the URI:
  http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-basic/xhtml-basic11.dtd
... gets mapped to:
  www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-basic/xhtml-basic11.dtd
... in the local filesystem.

That's the easiest way to maintain a local catalog and I would expect most developers to use similar rules. The hierarchy is preserved and the broken link remains when you do that. Note that I already fixed the local DTDs used by the mobileOK Checker: what's at stake here is not our validation tools).

I take your point ref the difficulty to update something in /TR space, I'm sure we'll find a way. There should not be any need to do that more than once in the spec's lifetime. Well, in theory that is ;)

Francois.


On 01/03/2011 06:46 PM, Shane McCarron wrote:
> Well... I meant 2. A validating parser is permitted to have a local catalog in which DOCTYPES are mapped to alternate locations, and I would certainly recommend that any validating parser have local versions of these DTDs and use them rather than beating on the W3C servers all the time.
>
> Regardless, you are of course correct that the versions in /TR space should be corrected. But this is VERY HARD TO DO at the W3C. So, for the nonce, is there a way you can get the W3C validator to look in /MarkUp/DTD for the XHTML family Document Types that were defined by the XHTML2 working group?
>
> On 1/3/2011 11:25 AM, Francois Daoust wrote:
>> On 01/03/2011 05:28 PM, Shane McCarron wrote:
>>> My recommendation is that you use the versions at http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/DTD - these versions work and will be maintained. There shouldn't even be a version in TR space. I thought I had ripped those out for the new release.
>>
>> Your comment may be read two ways:
>>
>> 1. use the version of the "xhtml-datatypes-1.mod" module in /MarkUp/DTD. I incorrectly referred to /TR/Markup/xhtml-datatypes-1.mod (which does not even exist) in my message, that was a typo, sorry for the confusion. The suggested correction does use the version in /MarkUp/DTD, indeed.
>>
>> 2. use the versions of the XHTML 1.1 and XHTML Basic 1.1 DTDs that appear in /MarkUp/DTD. That's not really possible since the DOCTYPE listed in the conformance section of these specs refers to, e.g. http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-basic/xhtml-basic11.dtd for XHTML Basic 1.1. A validating XML parser would de facto use that URI to retrieve the DTDs.
>>
>> Francois.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On 12/13/2010 11:29 AM, Francois Daoust wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> The XHTML Basic 1.1 [1] and XHTML 1.1 [2] DTDs were recently published with a link to the "xhtml-datatypes-1.mod" module. This module is defined in http://www.w3.org/TR/Markup/xhtml-datatypes-1.mod but the link that appears in the DTDs targets the folder in which the DTD is defined, resulting in a broken link.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Extract from one of the DTD (same problem in both):
>>>> ==
>>>> <!ENTITY % xhtml-datatypes.mod
>>>> PUBLIC "-//W3C//ENTITIES XHTML Datatypes 1.0//EN"
>>>> "xhtml-datatypes-1.mod" >
>>>> ==
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Corrected extract:
>>>> ==
>>>> <!ENTITY % xhtml-datatypes.mod
>>>> PUBLIC "-//W3C//ENTITIES XHTML Datatypes 1.0//EN"
>>>> "http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/DTD/xhtml-datatypes-1.mod" >
>>>> ==
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Francois.
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-basic/DTD/xhtml-basic11.dtd
>>>> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd
>>>
>
Received on Monday, 3 January 2011 19:03:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:18:00 GMT