- From: Karl Ove Hufthammer <karl@huftis.org>
- Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:46:40 +0200
- To: www-html@w3.org
Masayasu Ishikawa <mimasa@w3.org> wrote in
news:20030514.194214.78713849.mimasa@w3.org:
> Having said that, the WG would try to approximate intended
> constraints to the extent possible by DTD if people still find
> it useful, but I'm still not convinced that requiring DTD
> validity is a good idea.
I agree. Requiring DTD validity to be a conforming XHTML document
means that we can have two canonically equivalent XHTML documents,
where one is valid (and conforming), and the other is not.
Example:
Document 1:
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
xml:lang="en-GB">...</html>
Document 2:
<prefix:html xmlns:prefix="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
xml:lang="en-GB">...</html>
These are equivalent, but only the first would be valid XHTML 1.0.
And yes, this could be a problem in practice. For example, an XSLT
transformation on two identical source documents could lead to
either of these resulting documents.
--
Karl Ove Hufthammer
http://blogg.huftis.org/
Received on Wednesday, 14 May 2003 17:47:03 UTC