- 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