W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > July 2013

Re: Warning validating with HTML 4.01+RDFa 1.1

From: Shane McCarron <ahby@aptest.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 12:37:22 -0500
Message-ID: <CAOk_reEkQ8B538t0tV2Le+-pTzDu-7dXeY3LB+83W7_Qip6U6w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Philip Taylor <P.Taylor@rhul.ac.uk>
Cc: Andrea Urbini <andrea.urbini@unifi.it>, www-validator@w3.org, Andrea Urbini <urbini@unifi.it>
Sure.  And I am of course a big fan.  Anyone can use XHTML+RDFa 1.1 .  I
was just towing the party line.  HTML5 is not done, but the HTML5 subset
that is HTML4 parsing rules is consistent with HTML4 and permits RDFa 1.1.

I will undertake to ensure that HTML 4.01+RDFa 1.1 DTD is updated, but we
can't take a position of recommending its use since it has been officially
deprecated in a recommendation.


On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Philip Taylor <P.Taylor@rhul.ac.uk> wrote:

>
>
> Shane McCarron wrote:
>
> > The W3C working group responsible for that document removed that advice
> > in the recommendation when it was published.  That DTD is not supported,
> > and as far as I know is not up to date.  Sorry.
>
> Oh.  That is rather disappointing.  One should not be pushed into
> prematurely adopting a work-in-progress (HTML 5) simply in order
> both to be able to use two fully-ratified standards (RDFa and
> HTML 4.01).  Would it not be better to recommend XHTML+RDFa 1.1,
> as specified at :
>
>         http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-xhtml-rdfa-20120607/
>
> linked from :
>
>         http://www.w3.org/standards/techs/html#w3c_all
>
> which /is/ a fully-ratified standard ?
>
> Philip Taylor
>



-- 
Shane P. McCarron
Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc.
Received on Thursday, 11 July 2013 17:37:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 14:18:08 UTC