- From: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 13:42:12 -0400
- To: Shane McCarron <shane@spec-ops.io>
- Cc: Denis Ah-Kang <denis@w3.org>, Spec-prod <spec-prod@w3.org>
On 06/02/2016 01:29 PM, Shane McCarron wrote:
> I was just
> trying to understand the scope of the publication rules changes and how
> they are going to be enforced.
We're changing from:
[[
All normative representations MUST validate as one of the following:
HTML 4.x, or some version of XHTML or XHTML+RDFa that is a W3C
Recommendation. HTML5 is also permitted with the following limitations:
Inline markup for SVG 1.1 or MathML 2.0 is permitted but only with
a (fallback) alternative.
If the HTML5 validator issues content warnings, the publication
request must include rationale why the warning is not problematic.
Note: Please consider how your content will render in browsers that do
not support HTML5.
]]
to
[[
All normative representations MUST validate as HTML5 with the following
limitations:
Inline markup for MathML is permitted but should use a (fallback)
alternative.
If the HTML5 validator issues content warnings, the publication
request must include rationale why the warning is not problematic.
]]
https://github.com/w3c/specberus/pull/388
This check happens in:
https://github.com/w3c/specberus/blob/master/lib/rules/validation/html.js
I will note that the current XHTML+RDFa recommendation is ok with check:
https://validator.w3.org/nu/?doc=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2Fxhtml-rdfa%2F
Philippe
Received on Thursday, 2 June 2016 17:42:14 UTC