W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > April to June 2013

Re: Regarding XHTML format output

From: Shane McCarron <ahby@aptest.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 11:14:31 -0500
Message-ID: <CAOk_reE2K+j=g0DYP_hZMy-=8Krqz-RBpkQFBH2pNaCsUDFS=A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
Cc: "spec-prod@w3.org Prod" <spec-prod@w3.org>
I assumed that HTML5 Tidy wouldn't understand RDFa.  I will look into it.
 Thanks!


On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Thursday, June 20, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Shane McCarron wrote:
>
> > I know that we have discussed eliminating the XHTML format / removing
> support for it. But today, for example, when I am publishing an updated
> XHTML+RDFa specification and really want the spec in XHTML+RDFa format, the
> support is still important. I note that there are a handful of recent
> changes that make the resulting output invalid. I am absolutely willing to
> submit fixes for this, but I want to be sure there won't be pushback from
> people.
> >
> > So, my question is "would anyone object if I were to update the XHTML
> generation so that it generates valid output"?
> No… though why don't you just run the output through HTML5 Tidy and get it
> to output XHTML? It might save you a bunch of time (and won't introduce
> code in to Respec that will only get limited use).
>
> --
> Marcos Caceres
>
>
>
>


-- 
Shane P. McCarron
Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc.
Received on Thursday, 20 June 2013 16:15:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:55:18 UTC