- From: <ddcc@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 14:01:17 -0500 (EST)
- To: Masayasu Ishikawa <mimasa@w3.org>
- cc: <www-html-editor@w3.org>
I'm using XHTML 1.1. But my point is, in the DTD for PUBLIC "-//W3C//ELEMENTS XHTML Document Structure 1.0//EN" at http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/DTD/xhtml-struct-1.mod the body's content is given as <!ENTITY % body.content "( %Block.mix; )+" > meaning that the body cannot be empty (unless, I guess, you decide to make Block.mix empty), whereas the text documentation at http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/abstract_modules.html#s_structuremodule lists it as (Heading | Block | List)*, allowing the body to be empty. I was just wondering if the two should be made consistent. On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Masayasu Ishikawa wrote: > Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 20:33:43 +0900 (JST) > From: Masayasu Ishikawa <mimasa@w3.org> > To: ddcc@MIT.EDU > Cc: www-html-editor@w3.org > Subject: Re: Can the <body> tag be empty > > David <ddcc@MIT.EDU> wrote: > > > The XHTML modularization page seems to suggest that we can have empty body > > tags, such as <body></body>. > > > > http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/abstract_modules.html#s_structuremodule > > lists the contents of body as (Heading | Block | List)*, meaning that all > > are optional. > > As the minimal content model. That doesn't mean it's optional for > all XHTML Family document types. > > > However, the XHTML validator at http://validator.w3.org won't let me have > > empty bodies. > > Which version of XHTML you're using? > > Regards, >
Received on Monday, 14 January 2002 14:07:16 UTC