W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-editor@w3.org > October to December 2001

Re: Editorial XHTML issues

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 17:04:03 -0500
Message-ID: <3BC61753.C07D4B0@w3.org>
To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
CC: xml-editor@w3.org, www-validator@w3.org, tbray@textuality.com
Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>    The current XHTML 1.0 document for the XML 1.0 Second Edition
> Recommendation is actually invalid XHTML and must not be labeled as
> text/html.

Hmm... these issues don't show up using our normal validation tools...
 
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-xml-20001006

I wonder if some sort of XSLT-based check could be added
to the validator to check this sort of thing... hm...

> There are at least two issues here. First, section 4.10 of
> XHTML 1.0 requires for certain elements to use the id attribute to use
> fragment identifiers, they only may use the name attribute in addition
> to the id attribute. For example, the anchor for #dt-xmldecl only uses
> the name attribute, while the document later refers to #dt-xmldecl.

Sure enough... looks like a bug. We'll have to fix that if/when
we update the XML REC.

> Second, it only uses the 'lang' attribute on the html element and the
> abbr element for 'INRIA', XHTML 1.0

I gather you mean section C.7 The lang and xml:lang Attributes
specifcially, yes?

http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-xhtml1-20000126/#guidelines

> requires documents to follow the
> compatibility guidelines in order to deliver XHTML 1.0 documents as
> text/html, thus the xml:lang attribute has to be added to both.

Yes, I agree that looks like a bug too.

> I would be the way like to see usage of the 'dfn' element in the
> document...
> 
> regards,

Thanks for the attention to detail...

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 11 October 2001 18:04:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:31 GMT