Re: ReSpec: Intent to depracate XHTML 1.0 save support

Sorry - having a thread in github and here is confusing.  I am going to
concentrate here.

We updated XHTML+RDFa as recently as last March.  It has an XHTML 1
version.

I also note that the Pubrules continues to permit XHTML.  I am not saying
that new specs should be authored in XHTML 1, but old specs get updated for
errata or reference changes from time to time.

On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 6:41 AM, <marcos@marcosc.com> wrote:

>
>
> On 16 May 2016, at 9:32 PM, Shane McCarron <shane@spec-ops.io> wrote:
>
> As I mentioned in the relevant PR, I think this is a bad idea.  There are
> a number of specs that were produced using XHTML 1, and if any of them need
> an update for errata of whatnot in the future, it will be impossible to do
> simply.
>
>
> Well, not impossible - but you'd have to update the markup. Or throw in a
> legacy version of ReSpec (so, not a big deal).
>
> Question: are any specs that are using xhtml 1.0 maintained today? Have
> they been updated in the last, say, 3-5 years? Are there examples of
> upcoming examples?
>
>
> On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 9:14 PM, Marcos Caceres <marcos@marcosc.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On May 16, 2016 at 12:13:39 PM, Marcos Caceres (marcos@marcosc.com)
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> > XHTML 1.0 has been long deprecated in favor of XHTML5. In ReSpec,
>> > we've been allowing folks to save as XHTML 1.0, but I'm wondering if
>> > we can retire that capability?
>> >
>> > Can anyone think of any valid reason to keep it around? It seems
>> > harmful, as saving to a conforming XHTML 1.0 doc means we strip out
>> > useful structuring tags and aria attributes.
>>
>> Relevant bug:
>> https://github.com/w3c/respec/issues/760
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Shane McCarron
> Projects Manager, Spec-Ops
>
>


-- 
Shane McCarron
Projects Manager, Spec-Ops