- From: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 12:40:00 +0900
- To: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Cc: www-validator Community <www-validator@w3.org>, www-html@w3.org, Tim HEAP <Timothy.Heap@ext.jrc.it>
Hi Shane, thank you very much for your answer, On Oct 16, 2006, at 22:35 , Shane McCarron wrote: > XHTML Modularization is undergoing an update right now. The DTD > modules in TR/xhtml-modularization are related to this new > revision, which does indeed contain these corrections. However, > this is not yet a recommendation. Once it is, XHTML 1.1 will be > updated to reflect the changes. I'm a little worried by the situation in which we are going to be between now and the time when XHTML 1.1 is updated to reflect these changes. In particular, the following things bother me, but hopefully it is just that I am misunderstanding some aspects. * In effect, there is a growing discrepancy between the (fixed) flat definition of XHTML 1.1, and its modular version. * XHTML 1.1 makes a normative reference to [XHTMLMOD], XHTML mod being the REC of XHTML modularization, the one dated 10 April 2001. yet XHTML 1.1's document type definition refers to DTDs in TR/xhtml- modularization/ and not /TR/2001/REC-xhtml-modularization-20010410 http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/references.html#a_normrefs So as a result we have three definitions of XHTML 1.1 * the spec prose, making a normative reference to the 20010410 xhtml modularization REC * the flattened DTD, which is not normative (?) * the modular DTD, which is now a moving target and different from what the spec prose defines Is this a correct interpretation of the situation? I am a little worried that it looks a lot like the situation we had when HTML 4.01 replaced HTML4, and (IIRC) the DTD System identifiers pointing to /TR/ html4 made a number of documents suddenly invalid. Maybe, at least, the next version of XHTML 1.1 should refer to the DTDs in dated space, so as to avoid such a situation... -- olivier
Received on Tuesday, 17 October 2006 03:40:10 UTC