- From: Masayasu Ishikawa <mimasa@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 18:43:03 +0900 (JST)
- To: james.anderson@setf.de
- Cc: www-html-editor@w3.org
james anderson <james.anderson@setf.de> wrote: > This practice is difficult for the uninitiated to work with. While such > documents should not be used as reference material, they do serve as the > basis for testing and should well be consistent and correct. Or, are > they just for show? Many "uninitiated" people were confused with the system identifiers shown in XHTML 1.0 Recommendation, that's why these "example" system identifiers were modified in the second edition. > To defer the document's coherence to the point where it becomes a > recommendation makes no sense. It makes nore sanse to change them in the > transition from draft to recommendation. That's because this is an update to the published Recommendation. > > DTDs are available, and can be referenced through "dated" URIs, like: > > > > http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-xhtml1-20011004/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd > > http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-xhtml1-20011004/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd > > which dtd has the same error as the one distributed in the zip file. We know, we are not allowed to modify any byte in published technical reports. Draft might contain errors, that's one of reasons why we don't update the "latest version" URI until new edition actually becomes a Recommendation. Regards, -- Masayasu Ishikawa / mimasa@w3.org W3C - World Wide Web Consortium
Received on Tuesday, 29 January 2002 07:41:07 UTC