Re: Icons for XHTML1.1

From: hunter (hunter@userfriendly.net)
Date: Sat, Jun 30 2001

  • Next message: hunter: "Re: Icons for XHTML1.1"

    Message-ID: <3B3E3371.E88DA20D@userfriendly.net>
    Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 16:15:45 -0400
    From: hunter <hunter@userfriendly.net>
    To: JAMESICUS@aol.com
    CC: www-validator@w3.org, Ken Cotterill <ken@me.com.au>
    Subject: Re: Icons for XHTML1.1
    
    
    bottom line is, its NOT validated against a DTD which isnt in the
    namespace yet, cant be...thats the way it works...so that validation
    means next to nothing IMHO
    
    HTH
    --
    JAMESICUS@aol.com wrote:
    > 
    > In a message dated 6/30/01 7:05:22 AM US Mountain Standard Time,
    > ken@me.com.au wrote:
    > 
    > > Go to http://ken.me.com.au/v3.html and click on the validation button at
    > the
    > > bottom. <snip>
    > 
    > Well, I am confused. The Validation you cite, Ken, contains the following
    > caveat:
    > 
    > Document type: unknown with namespace http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml
    > 
    > I don't see how that signifies that your Document was Validated as XHTML 1.1.
    > Could anyone explain this, please?
    > 
    > James Pickering
    > Tucson, Arizona
    
    -- 
    Michael B. Weiner, Linux+, Linux+ SME
    Systems Administrator/Partner
    The UserFriendly Network (UFN)
    --
    Linux Registered User #94900	Have you been counted?
    http://counter.li.org
    
    PGP: 30 1D CC BA 30 30 63 35  CD 58 E0 89 A9 17 CC C0  8C 55 F7 72
    
    .........    Escape the 'Gates' of Hell
      `:::'                  .......  ......
       :::  *                  `::.    ::'
       ::: .::  .:.::.  .:: .::  `::. :'
       :::  ::   ::  ::  ::  ::    :::.
       ::: .::. .::  ::.  `::::. .:'  ::.
    ...:::.....................::'   .::::..
    --