- From: Shane McCarron <ahby@aptest.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 07:40:06 -0600
- To: Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>
- Cc: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>, "spec-prod@w3.org" <spec-prod@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAOk_reFvpBXjK1=jagtX3Fwx57F6KugUE0UvQWsoD7BXHn=bWg@mail.gmail.com>
I would scream. We use the XHTML format for formal W3C publications (and XHTML+RDFa). If there are errors in the output, I am happy to fix them. Can you elaborage on the errors? On Friday, February 22, 2013, Michael Cooper wrote: > ** > 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 <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'cooper@w3.org');> > Information Page <http://www.w3.org/People/cooper/> > -- Shane P. McCarron Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc.
Received on Friday, 22 February 2013 13:40:35 UTC