W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > June 2005

Re: Microformats?

From: Philip TAYLOR <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2005 17:12:38 +0100
Message-ID: <42A475F6.5030206@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
To: David Dorward <david@dorward.me.uk>
CC: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, www-validator@w3.org


David :

 > If you want to use a language other then (X)HTML and still validate,
 > then use a Doctype that references a custom DTD (and be aware that the
 > document IS non-standard and ISN'T HTML).

I am intrigued by these words, and whilst I agree with the sentiment
I am less certain about the reality.  If I compare your words with
those of the ALA page which you cite :

	A document written by using such a custom DTD may be
	validated against this DTD, but it will not be valid
	(X)HTML1.0 Strict, HTML 4.01 Transitional, or any other
	version of the HTML standard. It will be valid… something else.

then the elements in common are (a) that the document is non-standard,
and (b) that it isn't (valid) "(X)HTML1.0 Strict, HTML 4.01 Transitional,
or any other version of the HTML standard".  What the author of the ALA
does not claim, however, is that the document isn't (valid) HTML.  He
specifically restricts himself to enumerating a number of HTML dialects
and then referring to "the HTML standard".  The question which therefore
arises in my mind (and you may regard this as nit-picking, but I regard
it as a substantial difference) is whether a document can both be "HTML"
and yet not conform to "any version of the HTML standard".

Reference to

	http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue1/knight/

reveals that HTML 1.0 was both HTML (it could hardly have been otherwise)
and "an informal specification that was never entered as part of the Internet
standards process".  Thus I assert that the existence of such documents
demonstrates that a document can both be HTML and yet not conform to any
version of the HTML standard.

If you agree with my analysis, I would invite you to retract your
earlier assertion that a document that has "a Doctype that references
a custom DTD [...] ISN'T HTML" and replace it with something more
along the lines of the ALA wording which you cite.

Philip Taylor
Received on Monday, 6 June 2005 16:14:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:19 GMT