W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa@w3.org > April 2002

Location of doctype

From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 17:08:35 +0900
Message-Id: <p0511170bb8e426930d5d@[133.27.228.239]>
To: www-qa@w3.org
I think it's more a question for the TAG, but I think it's 
interesting to have the question here too.
http://www.w3.org/QA/2002/04/valid-dtd-list


There was a problem in the past with the HTML 4 doctype. Read the thread here.
	http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-validator/2000JanMar/0133.html


HTML 4.0 [1] has been updated in HTML 4.01 [2] and the initial dtd 
[3] given for HTML 4.0 has been used to validate against HTML 4.01


The question:
	- Do you think that even a DTD was bogus a new version of a 
REC should give a new URI for a dtd?
	- It has secondary implementation issues. For example, the 
software BBEdit to solve the issue of DOCTYPE among different version 
of HTML 4 has been implemented with dated URIs. The problem with this 
solution is that the CSS-validator does not want to validate against 
dated URIs for XHTML 1.0.
	who is right? who is wrong? both?


Ref:
[1] HTML 4.0 http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-html40-19980424/strict.dtd
[2] HTML 4.01 http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224/strict.dtd
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd




-- 
Karl Dubost / W3C - Conformance Manager
           http://www.w3.org/QA/

      --- Be Strict To Be Cool! ---
Received on Thursday, 18 April 2002 04:28:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 12:13:59 GMT