Re: XHTML 1.1 DTD is broken, additional sub-dtd pages included from primary dtd missing from website, causes validation error

Update: So, I'm not sure which is wrong, the xhtml11 dtd or the site, 
but I found the 'missing' file, xhtml-datatypes-1.mod. . .

I noticed that a bunch of the other files that are included from the 
DTD, don't live under the path /TR/xhtml11/DTD, but instead, live under 
the path /Markup/DTD, so, I decided to check to see if the URL:

Is a valid path, and yes, when I went there in my web browser, it 
download the file. So, either the file is at the wrong location and 
needs to be moved (or copied), or the dtd document has the wrong path 
and needs to be updated.

Hope that helps.

On 1/9/2023 7:27 AM, Jeff Schmidt wrote:

> Hello,
>    I was experimenting with XHTML version 1.1. Yes, I know that it is 
> superseded by XHTML5, but, there is no official DTD or XSD for XHTML5. 
> I wanted to try testing validation of an XML document with a command 
> line XML validator tool. I was then, once I knew it was working 
> correctly, going to try getting an xhtml5 document and seeing if I 
> could validate against the unofficial v.Nu xhtml5 relaxng schemas.
> According to the page:
> A valid xhtml11 document MUST include both a DOCTYPE referencing the 
> DTD and MAY include a reference to the XSD. The following is the 
> recommended DOCTYPE and root html element:
> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN"
>      "">
> <html xmlns=""  xml:lang="en"
>        xmlns:xsi=""
>        xsi:schemaLocation=""
> >
> When I attempted to validate my .xhtml document which included the 
> above, since there was a DTD declaration, the validator automatically 
> attempted to validate against the DTD at:
> The validator threw the following error:
> Since my document doesn't directly reference that URL, I figured that 
> it must be included from xhtml11.dtd, and I verified that by going and 
> searching in the file xhtml11.dtd, and yes, indeed it does include it.
> So, I tried loading that URL in my browser, and got a 404 page not 
> found error.
> So, this means that one cannot validate against the public xhtml11 dtd 
> published on the website currently. I know this is a superseded 
> standard, but, the validation files should still be available and 
> should forever be available on the website, because even though 
> it's superseded, people should still be able to use it if they so 
> choose and it meets their needs, and additionally, they may need to 
> validate and process legacy xhtml files generated either in the past, 
> or by old web apps/sites that were written against xhtml11.
> Please fix this missing page (and any other pages that may also be 
> missing from the site) so that xhtml validation against the dtd works 
> (although, ideally, I'd like my documents to validate against the xsd, 
> not the dtd, but currently, I haven't found a way to get the java 
> validator code to ignore the DOCTYPE and just validate against the 
> DTD, except to remove the DOCTYPE element (which, then my doc DID 
> validate successfully against the xsd).

Received on Monday, 9 January 2023 22:38:34 UTC