- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 15:57:44 -0600
- To: XHTML WG <public-xhtml2@w3.org>
- CC: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
(copying Benjamin since he is not on our mailing list). Benjamin pointed out today that it is likely very difficult for people reading our recommendations to know that we require XML 1.0 *only*. I know this, and you all know this (probably), and a standards lawyer reading XHTML M12N 1.0 / 1.1 and XHTML whatever might get there, but for people writing XHTML documents this is not really explicitly stated anywhere. This arose because someone went and validated a document that had an xml declaration that cited version 1.1. It validated just fine! But it probably shouldn't. And at the very least, we should be explicit in our conformance clauses that this is not a good thing. I proposed the text like the following to Benjamin, and he seemed to feel it might help: "Note that all XHTML Family specifications, including this one, are based upon XML 1.0. Conforming Documents that contain an XML declaration MUST only reference version 1.0 in that XML declaration. Conforming User Agents MUST support processing as required by XML 1.0." With suitable references to the conformance clauses and normative references of XHTML M12N 1.1. Any objections to adding these simple statements to our PERs? They have apparently not been published yet. -- Shane P. McCarron Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120 Managing Director Fax: +1 763 786-8180 ApTest Minnesota Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Monday, 26 January 2009 21:58:28 UTC