- From: Jonathan Stanley <jon@lambcutlet.org>
- Date: Sat, 3 May 2003 17:58:52 +0100
- To: "Gannon J. Dick" <gdick@verizon.net>, <www-validator@w3.org>
I used a unique id is used to give it a "hook" for user specified CSS, so that they can specify CSS rules by: html#mydomain elem.class { foo: bar; } Giving body a unique id would suffce in HTML4, but it seems in XHTML, and sending as application/xhtml+xml to compliant agents (Gecko and Amaya), for Gecko at least, <html> is a better place to give the unique id than usng <body>, since <body> looses it's "magicness", and <html> behaves more like the canvas. I can do this in XHTML1.0 (Strict or Transitional) but I _cannot_ do so in XHTML1.1, which should just be XHTML1.0 Strict modularized. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gannon J. Dick" <gdick@verizon.net> To: "Jonathan Stanley" <jon@lambcutlet.org>; <www-validator@w3.org> Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2003 5:46 PM Subject: Re: XHTML1.1 DTD errata or Validator bug? > What would be the value of a unique <head> component anyway? Except maybe > to fool a browser display ... > You would probably want to hide same from a HTTP HEAD request too. > So, IMHO the better way to do that (in the body) is <div id="foo" > style="display:none;"> ... > Gannon J. Dick > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jonathan Stanley" <jon@lambcutlet.org> > To: <www-validator@w3.org> > Sent: Friday, May 02, 2003 2:07 PM > Subject: XHTML1.1 DTD errata or Validator bug? > > > > > > Hello > > > > As I understand from HTML4 and XHTML1 Strict, the "id" attribute is > global, > > and can be applied to any element, and indeed, reading through said DTDs > and > > valdating a test case page where there was an "id=foo" inside the <html> > > element, the said page would pass when validated as HTML4 or XHTML1. > > > > However, when the DTD was set to XHTML1.1, the validator will error with: > > > > --- > > This page is not Valid XHTML 1.1!... there is no attribute "id". > > --- > > > > The "highest level" element this seems to be allowed is the <body> tag, > but > > looking through the XHTML1.1 DTD modules, I cannot accertain whether this > is > > deliberate on the part of XHTML1.1, it is an errata with the DTD, or > whether > > it's a bug with regards to the validator? > > > > Thanks. > > > > Jon Stanley > > >
Received on Saturday, 3 May 2003 12:58:53 UTC