http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3164 ------- Comment #6 from cmsmcq@w3.org 2007-03-24 02:04 ------- The characters in question are indeed allowed by the XML 1.0 specification (although in 1.1, I believe they are allowed only in the form of character references, not as literals). There appear to be discrepancies in every SGML declaration I've found which claims to represent XML in SGML terms: they all declare these as UNUSED characters (i.e. non-SGML characters, not to appear literally). But are they allowed by XHTML 1.0? XHTML 1.0 describes itself as a reformulation in XML of HTML 4. And HTML 4 includes an SGML declaration (which I believe to be normative) which excludes these characters. http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224/sgml/sgmldecl.html The relevant part of the document character set declaration in the HTML 4 SGML declaration reads: 127 1 UNUSED 128 32 UNUSED If the character-repertoire restrictions of HTML 4 are inherited by XHTML 1.0, then I think the validator is right to reject these characters. Further discussion and details of this logic may be found at http://www.w3.org/People/cmsmcq/2007/C1.xmlReceived on Saturday, 24 March 2007 02:04:20 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 20 September 2007 14:33:16 GMT