W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > January 2002

Re: xmlns

From: Frank Ellermann <frank.ellermann@t-online.de>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 18:56:40 +0100
Message-ID: <3C519C58.7EB4@t-online.de>
To: Masayasu Ishikawa <mimasa@w3.org>
CC: www-validator@w3.org
Masayasu Ishikawa wrote:
> XHTML 1.0 Strict and Transitional share the same namespace
> "http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml". Declaring a namespace doesn't
> help for your purpose.

Tnx, this explains why 2 of my 3 experiments failed.  But the
3rd variant <dummy xmlns=""><base target="_top" /></dummy>
failed too, and this was essentially a copy of an example in
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-names/#defaulting (5.2, last part:
<details xmlns=""> etc. </details> within an XHTML <table>).

> DTD-based validation and namespaces are not really
> compatible.

As long as the <details> resp. <dummy> section is well-formed,
i.e. the validator finds the corresponding end tag etc., why
not simply ignore this section ?   
> If your REALLY have to do so, you might want to look at
> "Modularization of XHTML", at:
>     http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/

Tnx for this pointer.  No, not REALLY, but "all" (about 10 :-)
my "valid" documents were suddenly "invalid" after 14-09-2001,
and so I'm interested in bybassing new idiosyncrasies of future
validator versions...  For one document I had to create my own
"W3C XHTML 1.0 FAIL" logo ;-)

                     Tnx for infos, bye, Frank
FAIL at http://frank.ellermann.bei.t-online.de/ibm850.htm#links
Received on Friday, 25 January 2002 12:58:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 14:17:32 UTC