- From: Michel Fortin <michel.fortin@michelf.com>
- Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2006 20:07:50 -0500
Le 4 d?c. 2006 ? 17:19, Lachlan Hunt a ?crit : > I agree, but how are xml:lang, xml:base and xml:id any more > meaningless in HTML than xmlns? In XHTML you can avoid using xml:base (by not specifying a base) and xml:id (by using id). You can't avoid xmlns. That's why I think xmlns comes before these two in order of importance. It is also very difficult to avoid xml:lang which, just like "/>", can be scattered all over the file. That's why I'm trying to see if there is a possibility of a conformant solution. There's at least a practical solution that will work, which is to use the lang attribute alone, although this isn't conformant with XHTML. > The only reason xmlns was allowed was to help ease migration from > current XHTML 1.0 to HTML5. Although that logic made sense for '/ > >' which you often find scattered throughout many different files, > which makes it difficult to update, the xmlns attribute occurs in > one place, and that's usually in the same file as the DOCTYPE (in > cases where templates are used). Michel Fortin michel.fortin at michelf.com http://www.michelf.com/
Received on Monday, 4 December 2006 17:07:50 UTC