- From: Shane McCarron <ahby@aptest.com>
- Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 11:14:31 -0500
- To: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
- Cc: "spec-prod@w3.org Prod" <spec-prod@w3.org>
Received on Thursday, 20 June 2013 16:15:02 UTC
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