W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > June 2000

Re: The Future Of XHTML

From: Karl Ove Hufthammer <huftis@bigfoot.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 16:40:28 +0200
Message-ID: <009201bfdc57$ddb42760$90359fc3@huftis>
To: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>, "Sean Palmer" <sean_b_palmer@yahoo.com>
Cc: <www-html@w3.org>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>
To: "Sean Palmer" <sean_b_palmer@yahoo.com>
Cc: <www-html@w3.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2000 3:27 PM
Subject: Re: The Future Of XHTML


| Sean Palmer wrote:
| >
| > Hello everyone,
| > Has anyone noticed that valid XHTML can sometimes not
| > be valid XML?
|
| No; this cannot be the case, by definition of XHTML.
|
| > Try it: simply change the extension of a
| > valid XHTML document to xml, or change the MIME type
| > at what ever server you have, and run it through a
| > validator. Doesn't work, does it?
|
| Do you have an example? I'm quite sure that
| every valid XHTML document is a valid XML document.

That's true.

This is a (very serious) bug in the W3C validator, that has been known
for some times. The validator claims that the XHTML is legal when it's
just well-formed (you can feed it an MathML document with a XHTML
doctype and the validator says it's legal XHTML). This has been
discussed on the www-validator@w3.org list. On the 2000-06-13, Gerald
Oskoboiny said:

"I get back this weekend, and plan to fix the problems with XHTML
validation very soon. (next week sometime.)"

Hopefully it will be fixed soon.

-- 
Karl Ove Hufthammer
Received on Thursday, 22 June 2000 10:41:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:43 GMT