- From: Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@iki.fi>
- Date: 25 Jan 2003 13:37:22 +0200
- To: Frederic Schutz <schutz@mathgen.ch>
- Cc: www-validator@w3.org, Adam DiCarlo <adam@onshored.com>
On Fri, 2003-01-24 at 02:30, Frederic Schutz wrote: > -- generalized HTML reference, meaning 'latest HTML recommendation' -- > -- aka, what is published at http://www.w3.org/TR/html -- > PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML//EN" > xml/1.0/xhtml1-strict.dtd > DTDDECL "-//W3C//DTD HTML//EN" > xml/1.0/xhtml1.dcl > PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML//EN" > xml/1.0/xhtml1-strict.dtd > DTDDECL "-//W3C//DTD XHTML//EN" > xml/1.0/xhtml1.dcl > > Is there anything wrong using these ids, or are they just "non-official" ? Well, by putting "W3C" in the id's, they're basically saying that they're from W3C, which AFAICT is not true. "-//Debian//DTD HTML//EN" would be ok. Personally, I don't see what good would using such a generic "latest HTML recommendation" public identifier be, IMHO the following blurb at the top of the documents is roughly equivalent to it. <!-- This document has not been written to conform to the constraints of any specific DTD; the author is just trying to say she claims that it's always up to date with the latest recommendations. YMMV. --> Oh, and asking this on www-html@ would probably be a good idea. -- \/ille Skyttä ville.skytta at iki.fi
Received on Saturday, 25 January 2003 06:37:21 UTC