W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > October 2001

Re: XHTML 1.0: Appendix C normative? (PR#617)

From: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 13:53:37 +0200
Message-ID: <010901c15c82$869b19a0$7ef5a8c0@ins.cwi.nl>
To: <derhoermi@gmx.net>, <w3c-html-wg@w3.org>, <www-html@w3.org>
Cc: <voyager-issues@mn.aptest.com>
> From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>

>    Since Appendix C ("HTML Compatibility Guidelines") defines mandatory
> requirements for text/html delivery of XHTML documents ([1]) it should
> be normative. Why isn't it? Won't XHTML documents not following Appendix
> C but delivering as text/html have an excuse for this, since it is just
> informative?

The definition of what text/html means is defined not by XHTML 1.0, but by
RFC 2854. The reason that Appendix C is informative is because if you follow
those guidelines, you may find that your documents will work with user
agents that accept text/html. It does not define conformance, nor are the
guidelines mandatory: you don't have to follow them, but if you don't, don't
expect your document to work on old user agents.

> [1] mandatory through normative section 5.1, I believe; this is btw.
>     contrary to section 5, where which states "... there is no
>     requirement for XHTML 1.0 documents to be compatible with existing
>     user agents ..."

Indeed there is no such requirement on XHTML 1.0 documents. However, if you
want to go the extra mile, you can.

Best wishes,

Steven Pemberton
Chair, W3C HTML Working Group
Received on Wednesday, 24 October 2001 07:55:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:49 GMT