Re: Removing XHTML saving from ReSpec?

I use the XHTML output because I edit in an XML editor, and there is
always fine tuning to do after the respec output. So I want output that
the editor will accept. I don't have a working HTML editor that I like,
for a variety of reasons.

What really matters for this use case is that the output be well-formed
from an XML perspective, not that it be technically XML or have a given
DOCTYPE (changing that is one of the tweaks I make). Mostly, that means
outputting <br/> instead of <br> and the like, since otherwise the
output tends to be well formed anyways. If the HTML output did that (or
had an option to do that), I wouldn't object to dropping XHTML output.
But if that feature were to be lost, it would cause me extra work in
repeatedly cleaning up well-formedness just so I can tweak documents, or
switching editing tools that is difficult to do.

Another impact of losing well-formed output would be difficulty in
running XML-based post-processing, such as XSLT. I can't push this use
case too hard, since I'm not currently doing that with Respec-based
documents - but I used to, and can imagine needing to again. Mostly I
would do such processing on the raw document prior to Respec, so this
might not be an issue, but it would be good not to rule out that use
case. In general I prefer specs I publish to be well-formed X[ML|HTML]
to maximize the range of tools that can consume them.

Michael

Robin Berjon wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm considering removing the save as XHTML option from ReSpec. All it
> does is confuse people, and it produces XHTML5 (which no one seems to
> validate) what's more with the wrong DOCTYPE.
>
> Would anyone scream? I expect screaming to be accompanied by solid
> technical justifications (albeit at high volume and pitch).
>

-- 

Michael Cooper
Web Accessibility Specialist
World Wide Web Consortium, Web Accessibility Initiative
E-mail cooper@w3.org <mailto:cooper@w3.org>
Information Page <http://www.w3.org/People/cooper/>