- From: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
- Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 15:48:51 +0200
- To: "olivier Thereaux" <ot@w3.org>, "HTML WG" <w3c-html-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: "XHTML WG" <public-xhtml2@w3.org>
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 04:05:33 +0200, olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org> wrote: > Dear HTML WG, > > We recently got reports that the markup validator at w3c had issues with > XHTML Basic 1.1 document, which was a surprise to me because I did not > know there was a 1.1 version of that spec in the works. Not reading W3C news ;-)? http://www.w3.org/News/2006#x20060705a I'm surprised there are issues. Want to summarise? > I have now added that document type in our catalog, may I request that: > * You inform us (www-validator) when there is any new document type > created by the HTML WG It's not clear to us why you need to add it to the catalog. There is a public URL for the sysid. Our experience is that Basic 1.1 works out of the box with the validator. > * You inform us of any publication or republication of DTDs, so that we > can update the catalog of the validator? That information is always in the W3C news, wouldn't that be enough? > as it will not only help us stay in sync with your specs, and help > adoption of the specs, it will also expose an important audience to your > work on these specs. > > Also, for the sake of the validator's test suite, could you provide us > with a few examples of XHTML Basic 1.1 documents? Yes. This is a cooperative work with OMA, and they are responsible for the test suite. The suite is currently located at http://testfest.openmobilealliance.org/ > I would also strongly suggest adding to the XHTML Basic 1.1 spec: > * a list of changes from XHTML Basic 1.0, which it replaces Of course; that has already been done. Please see the abstract. Best wishes, Steven
Received on Thursday, 29 March 2007 13:49:08 UTC