WD-xhtml2-20030131: Typos and Queries

Hi,

Below are some more thoughts I have on the fourth public Working Draft
of XHTML 2.0:

  * 1.1.1. Backwards Compatibility and 1.1.2. XHTML2 and Presentation.
    Both refer to "XHTML2" (no space) rather than "XHTML 2".

  * 1.1.3. Design Aims.  Should "In designing XHTML" instead be "In
    designing XHTML 2"?

  * 13. XHTML Metainformation Module.  To encourage good practice, would
    it be better to make more reference to Dublin Core?  For example,
    use "DC.Creator" instead of "Author".

  * 13.1.1. Meta and Search Engines.  Again with reference to Dublin
    Core, the "keywords" example could be changed to something like:

        <link rel="schema.DC" href="http://purl.org/dc"/>
        <!-- For speakers of US English -->
        <meta name="DC.Subject"
            xml:lang="en-us">vacation, Greece, sunshine</meta>
        <!-- For speakers of British English -->
        <meta name="DC.Subject"
            xml:lang="en">holiday, Greece, sunshine</meta>
        <!-- For speakers of French -->
        <meta name="DC.Subject"
            xml:lang="fr">vacances, Gr&egrave;ce, soleil</meta>

  * No mention of media type -- presumably it's still
    "application/xhtml+xml"?  (If this is the case, RFC 3236 may need to
    be updated to mention the new XHTML namespace.)

  * XML Stylesheet PI.  Is <http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-stylesheet/>
    depreciated?  Is it good or bad practice to include such a PI in an
    XHTML 2 document?  Does this change if I serve "text/xml" or
    "application/xml" rather than "application/xhtml+xml"?  I think some
    mention of it should be made.

  * XML 1.1.  Is XHTML 2 an application of XML 1.1 as well as XML 1.0?

I'd like to add, I think the HTML Working Group has done a sterling job
so far, and I'll look forward to seeing the first public DTD and XML
Schema.  :o)

Thanks,

Dave

Received on Friday, 21 March 2003 12:29:56 UTC