W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2005

Re: [CSS21] Wider variety of (non-junk) examples requested

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 16:26:07 +0200
Message-ID: <378598073.20050826162607@w3.org>
To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Cc: www-style@w3.org

On Friday, August 26, 2005, 10:48:42 AM, Bjoern wrote:

BH> * Chris Lilley wrote:
>>This comment is sent from the CDF WG
>>
>>  All HTML examples conform to the HTML 4.0 strict DTD (defined in
>>  [HTML40]) unless otherwise indicated by a document type declaration.
>>  http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-CSS21-20050613/about.html#q15
>>
>>They may do so, but unless they say so explicitly with a DOCTYPE
>>declaration they are not valid; furthermore HTML 4 does not have a
>>notion of well formedness or any lesser criterion than validity. HTML4
>>examples are thus either valid or junk.

BH> So, in http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-WICD-20050809/ an "example" like

BH>   <html:a href="LargeMap.html">
BH>     <html:object type="image/svg+xml" data="child.svg"/>
BH>   </html:a>

BH> is, as you say, "junk"

No; I asked (in the part you trimmed immediately after that quote) for a
minimal quality level (well formed or valid, depending on whether its
SGML or XML). That example meets the minimum (its well formed); I agree
that if it had a namespace declaration it would be better, and will
ensure this gets fixed. Then again, the specification to which you refer
is a first WD, not a Last Call. So perhaps we can concentrate on the
document under discussion.

BH> because it is not a strictly conforming XHTML family document?

I didn't ask for that level of quality, just a minimal level, but feel
free to surpass my expectations.

BH>  So the CDF WG's concern is that specifications must
BH> not include code fragments but only complete documents as examples?

Its trivially easy to make a code fragment well formed. You have in the
past, and rightly so, complained in the past about non well formed
examples; I join my voice to yours here.

BH> I don't think that would be a good constraint

Getting back to the original point, the minimal quality level that
satisfies the objection is to make all examples either well formed (if
they are XML) or (if they are SGML, not XML) valid. Please let me know
how the CSS WG plans to resolve this comment; your initial response is
not a satisfactory resolution.



-- 
 Chris Lilley                    mailto:chris@w3.org
 Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
 W3C Graphics Activity Lead
Received on Friday, 26 August 2005 14:26:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:40 GMT