- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 11:10:59 -0600
- To: Roland Merrick <roland_merrick@uk.ibm.com>
- CC: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>, XHTML WG <public-xhtml2@w3.org>, public-xhtml2-request@w3.org
I think the point is that XHTML M12N and derivatives do not have any processing rules for anything other than XML 1.0 documents. If a document has an xml declaration of version 1.1, I do not think a conforming user agent is required to process it as we have defined. But I could be wrong.... guess I could ask the tag? Roland Merrick wrote: > > Greetings Shane, I'm not sure that anything else should be added to the > PERs but if we did want to add a para I'd suggest that we soften it a > little and say SHOULD rather than MUST. > > Regards, Roland > > > From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com> > To: XHTML WG <public-xhtml2@w3.org> > Cc: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com> > Date: 26/01/2009 22:02 > Subject: XML Version and our recommendations > > > > > > > (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 > > > > > > > > > / > / > > /Unless stated otherwise above: > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number > 741598. > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU/ > > > > > > -- Shane P. McCarron Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120 Managing Director Fax: +1 763 786-8180 ApTest Minnesota Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Wednesday, 28 January 2009 17:12:19 UTC