- From: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 11:43:22 +0100
- To: shane@aptest.com
- CC: Shane McCarron <ahby@aptest.com>, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>, "spec-prod@w3.org" <spec-prod@w3.org>
On 22/02/2013 14:40 , Shane McCarron wrote: > 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? Well the most common source of confusion is people writing in to say that they don't understand why the validator is rejecting their <section> elements, or conversely why ReSpec isn't removing them. The same applies to all other HTML5 constructs. Normally, removing the XHTML parts of the DOCTYPE might be enough to get past the validator. But how that interacts with RDFa validation, I do not know. Are you using XHTML just to get RDFa? What is preventing you from just using RDFa in HTML? The specs eventually always get served as text/html anyway. -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Monday, 25 February 2013 10:43:32 UTC