- From: Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 19:11:25 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
- To: Jelks Cabaniss <jelks@jelks.nu>
- cc: html-tidy@w3.org
On Mon, 10 May 1999, Jelks Cabaniss wrote:
> Any word on the next release of Tidy supporting the latest xhtml
> WD's namespace and DOCTYPE's system identifiers?
Yes, the next release will support the single namespace now agreed
for XHTML 1.0 and the corresponding doctype identifiers.
> There is a minor bug wrt xhtml and the "clean" option. It creates CSS like
>
> DIV.c1 { ... }
> P.c2 { ... } /* etc. */
>
> where xml docs (including xhtml) with
>
> <div class="c1"> ... </div>
> <p class="c2"> ... </p>
>
> wouldn't match up to the above styles, though it "works" in
> current HTML+CSS browsers displaying xhtml. Then again,
> "div.c1", "p.c2", etc. would work in the current crop *and*
> future XML-aware browsers.
Thanks for spotting this case discrepancy.
> A suggestion for the configuration file ... an option to force
> the desired output DOCTYPE declaration. Something like
>
> doctype: omit | guess | strict | loose | <!DOCTYPE ...
>
> where the default behavior is "guess" (current behavior). The
> output format (HTML or XHTML -- implied or specified elsewhere)
> determines whether the "strict" or "loose" applied to HTML 4.0
> or XHTML 1.0. The final choice above would be for a custom
> DOCTYPE not covered by the other ones (such as HTML 2.0 and
> 3.2).
I assume you want this to control stripping out of presentational
features, no? Let me know what your goals are here.
> There might be better ways to do this, but I think the ability
> to specify the DOCTYPE would prove handy.
>
> $0.25 ...
But costing rather more than that to deal with, I think :-)
Best wishes,
-- Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett
phone: +44 122 578 2984 (or 2521) +44 385 320 444 (gsm mobile)
World Wide Web Consortium (on assignment from HP Labs)
Received on Monday, 17 May 1999 14:06:00 UTC