W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > October 2007

Re: XHTML 1.1 validator rejects xml:space attributes

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 11:17:20 -0500
Message-ID: <470CFB10.6000306@aptest.com>
To: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
CC: david.dufour@free.fr, XHTML WG <public-xhtml2@w3.org>, www-validator@w3.org

The XHTML 2 Working Group suggests that you try very hard to NOT include 
our DTDs directly in your distribution, instead referring to the 
authoritative locations for them.  That way, when we make fixes like 
these, it will just work for your users. 

Having said that, yes - the XHTML 1.1 DTD has been updated in a working 
draft that will soon go to PER status.  That draft fixes the problem 
with xml:space and a couple of other minor issues.  It is 100% backward 
compatible with the previous version.  The validator service should use 
our DTD in the MarkUp/DTD space.

olivier Thereaux wrote:
>
> Bonjour David, Hi all.
>
> On Oct 4, 2007, at 19:30 , david.dufour@free.fr wrote:
>> W3C validator rejects the xml:space attribute and tells me the 
>> document is not
>> valid XHTML 1.1.
>
>> Moreover, why this attribute has been added in XHTML 1.1 is explained 
>> in W3C
>> FQA:
>> "Why is xml:space set to 'preserve' on all elements of XHTML?"
>
> Ack, this is an issue which was not on my radar. Thank you for 
> bringing it up.
> The cause is that:
> - XHTML 1.1 went to the status of RECommendation. This usually means, 
> "finished, stable, standardized".
> - the validator uses this (and the DTD published at the time) to 
> validate XHTML 1.1
> - XHTML 1.1, however, went back to "working draft" since then. It is 
> less stable, of course, than the older REC, but fixes are added in.
>
> The usual practice is not to include draft versions of DTDs into the 
> validator, but to wait at least until PR. However, in this case of a 
> specification going from REC back into WD for a second edition. The 
> validator could use the latest WD's version for validation of XHTML 
> 1.1, if _and only if_ changes from the 1st edition REC won't make a 
> valid XHTML 1.1 document now invalid.
>
> XHTML WG folks, would you confirm that this is the case, and advise 
> whether it is a good idea, for the sake of XHTML 1.1 adoption, to 
> update the validator's catalog?
>
> Many thanks.

-- 
Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Wednesday, 10 October 2007 16:17:45 GMT

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