- From: Philip Taylor <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
- Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 18:13:12 +0100
- To: shane@aptest.com
- CC: Andrea Urbini <andrea.urbini@unifi.it>, www-validator@w3.org, Andrea Urbini <urbini@unifi.it>
Shane McCarron wrote: > The W3C working group responsible for that document removed that advice > in the recommendation when it was published. That DTD is not supported, > and as far as I know is not up to date. Sorry. Oh. That is rather disappointing. One should not be pushed into prematurely adopting a work-in-progress (HTML 5) simply in order both to be able to use two fully-ratified standards (RDFa and HTML 4.01). Would it not be better to recommend XHTML+RDFa 1.1, as specified at : http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-xhtml-rdfa-20120607/ linked from : http://www.w3.org/standards/techs/html#w3c_all which /is/ a fully-ratified standard ? Philip Taylor
Received on Thursday, 11 July 2013 17:13:41 UTC