W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > February 2003

Re: css with xhtml-prologue

From: Chris Beggy <chrisb@kippona.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 01:58:22 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20030217.015822.17863631.chrisb@kippona.com>
To: kevin@rosenberg.net
Cc: www-validator@w3.org
On 16 Feb 2003, Kevin Rosenberg <kevin@rosenberg.net> wrote: 

> Chris Beggy wrote:
> > It seemed essential for xhtml 1.0 validation.  I'm happy with
> > xhtml 1.1, and surprised that it more relaxed than xhtml 1.0, or
> > html 4.01 for these two tags. Maybe the validator is b0rken.
> Before the xhtml 1.1 validator was online, the xhtml 1.0 validator was
> happy with my <link ...></link><meta ...></meta>. You can check
> http://lml.b9.com/ and see that the xhtml 1.0 validator is happy with that.

Yes, it validates to xhtml 1.0, but I think the validator is
hosed in this case.  The xhtml 1.1 doctype header is still there,
and this seems to have an effect on the validator's output.

If I strip out the xhmtl 1.1 doctype header and attempt to
force validation as xhmtl 1.0, it fails on </meta> and </link> trailing

If I add an xhtml 1.0 doctype declaration to the head of that
file and do auto detected validation, it also fails on </link> and
</meta> trailing tags.

> Nonetheless, since this tag doesn't contain anything, I'm happy to
> change it to a <link ... /> type tag.

If the present form is correct then don't change it.  On the
other hand, I don't want the tag to pass because of a broken
validator for one revision of the doctype.

I think there should be a way to create a valid html 4.01 style, i.e.
  <link ... >
and a way to create a valid xhtml 1.0 style:
  <link ... />

I've attached the test case which fails xhtml 1.0 validation.



Received on Monday, 17 February 2003 02:16:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:58:32 UTC