- From: <Svgdeveloper@aol.com>
- Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 04:00:39 EDT
- To: mf@w3.org, public-qt-comments@w3.org
- Message-ID: <15e.20b02f11.2c0c5e27@aol.com>
In a message dated 26/05/2003 19:59:15 GMT Daylight Time, mf@w3.org writes: > Section 5 XHTML Output method: > > "The serializer should output namespace declarations in a way that is > consistent with the requirements of the XHTML DTD if this is > possible. The DTD requires the declaration > xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" to appear on the html element, > and only on the html element." Max, It seems to me to be a questionable approach to tie serialization of XSLT / XQuery / whatever so tightly to a transitional technology - XHTML. Even if one considers that XHTML has some significant value then one must recall that the XHTML 1.0 Rec only defines XHTML documents which consist solely of XHTML. The Rec recognises that mixed-namespace documents which include elements from the XHTML namespace are also possible but fails to define how they are to be structured or handled. It seems to me to be wholly inappropriate to tie XSLT 2.0 serialization tightly to a narrow, backward-looking definition of XHTML 1.0. > > The first 'should' should be a 'must' or it would make the statement > allow serialisations that are not XHTML. XHTML1 says: > > "The root element of the document must contain an xmlns declaration > for the XHTML namespace [XMLNS]." I guess my more fundamental question is "Is an xhtml output method worth having? Andrew Watt "XHTML 2.0 - the W3C leading the Web to its full potential ... to implement yesterday's technology tomorrow"
Received on Monday, 2 June 2003 04:01:04 UTC