Re: Comments on the XHTML 2.0 WD (PR#7802)

David,

Our comments are embedded below.  Updates reflecting the changes we agreed to
will be in the next public draft.

> From: David H=E5s=E4ther <hasather@gmail.com>
> To: www-html@w3.org
> Cc: www-html-editor@w3.org
> Subject: Comments on the XHTML 2.0 WD
> Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 17:00:34 +0200
> Message-ID: <4295E492.9020905@gmail.com>
> X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/4295E492.9020905@gmail.com
> 
> 1. In the introduction, under "1.2. Major Differences with XHTML 1"[1] =
> 
> (third list item, second paragraph, starting with "If the resource...")=
>  =
> 
> it says:
> 
>    [...] or because images have been turned off) then the element is
>    used instead.
> 
> This should not talk about images alone, as it goes for any type of =
> 
> resource, and should also say "then the element[s content] is used =
> 
> instead" as it says in "XHTML Embedding Attributes Module"[2]

We have made some clarifying changes.

> 
> 2. In "Module Definition Conventions", shouldn't "5.4. Content Types"[3=
> ] =
> 
> say "5.4 Content Models" instead?

Yes

> Also, in the paragraph under that heading, it says:
> 
>    [...] the symbol used for text is PCDATA. This is a term, defined
>    in the XML 1.0 Recommendation, that refers to processed character
>    data.
> 
> Although it's not really wrong to call it "processed character data", =
> 
> why isn't the usual meaning "parsed character data" used?

Agreed.
 
> 3. In the "XHTML List Module"[4], the content model for dl is:
> 
>    label?, (( dt | dd)+ | di+)
> 
> This means that the definition data can appear before the term, which =
> 
> would be illogical. This should be changed to:
> 
>    label?, ((dt, dd)+ | di+)
> 
> Also, the content model for di is:
> 
>    ( dt+, dd*)
> 
> This means that no definition data is required. Unless there is a =
> 
> specific reason for this, it should be changed to:
> 
>    (dt, dd)+

No, because you might have terms with no definitions.

> 
> In the same page, under "11.4. The li element"[5] it says:
> 
>    When the href attribute is defined, the contents of the list item
>    become a selectable link, just as an a element with an href
>    attribute would be.
> 
> However, I think this is pretty clear already, and also, the spec =
> 
> doesn't say this for any other element type.

Removed.
 
> 4. In the definition for xml:base[6] in "XHTML Hypertext Attributes =
> 
> Module", the list for inheritance of URI base information should be
> an ordered list.
> The same goes for the xml:lang attribute in "XHTML I18N Attribute Modul=
> e"[7]

Fixed.

Received on Tuesday, 17 January 2006 16:51:24 UTC