- From: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
- Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 11:15:20 +0900
- To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Cc: public-i18n-geo@w3.org
At 06:24 05/07/02, Chris Lilley wrote: > >On Friday, July 1, 2005, 10:59:14 PM, Bjoern wrote: > >BH> * Chris Lilley wrote: >>>BH> the HTML Working Group so far >>>BH> refused to provide such clarification, >>> >>>The XML spec seems fairly clear on that point > >BH> The XML 1.0 Recommendation does not define requirements for XHTML user >BH> agents unless you consider normative references to XML 1.0 in the XHTML >BH> 1.0 Recommendation. The reference to XML 1.0 in XHTML 1.0 is neither >BH> normative nor clear. > >Thanks for pointing this out. It seems like a bug, that the reference to >XML is not normative. In particular, it seems that an erratum should be >issued mking it a normative reference, and this rolled into any >subsequent edition. Yes indeed. In fact, XML 1.0 is normatively referenced, it's just the text in the reference section that for some reason is declared as informative. For example, look at http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/REC-xhtml1-20020801/#uaconf. It starts: >>>>>>>> 3.2. User Agent Conformance A conforming user agent must meet all of the following criteria: In order to be consistent with the XML 1.0 Recommendation [XML], the user agent must parse and evaluate an XHTML document for well-formedness. If the user agent claims to be a validating user agent, it must also validate documents against their referenced DTDs according to [XML]. >>>>>>>> That seems clear enough to me. It's definitely a very clear expression of intent, and it's a normative reference to XML 1.0. Regards, Martin. P.S.: I'm still sometimes thinking back to the old days when most discussions were about new ideas and real functionality rather than about (to most, or so I hope) pretty obvious little oversights that should not detract from the main intent of the spec (of course, they should be fixed anyway).
Received on Tuesday, 5 July 2005 04:57:07 UTC