forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Crossley <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Finalizing html-ihtml-ehtml
Date Fri, 09 Apr 2004 02:26:27 GMT
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Dave Brondsema wrote:
> > 
> > 1 & 3 we could do now.  2 should wait until the xhtml2 switch.  Right?
> Well, in fact no :-)
> We can do (2) right now, but use XHTML1.0. When we switch to XHTML2.0 as 
> an intermediate format, it will be then trivial to add it to the DTDs 
> under XHTML.

Do you mean just switch the DOCTYPE declarations? And evolve the
stylesheets too i suppose. We would still need to support the old
XHTML1.0 and i gather that Sitemap matches that we have in place
respond to the Public Identifier, so it is well handled.

I do wonder if we might be painting ourselves into a corner by
depending on the doctype declaration. That ties us to DTDs because
the parser must resolve it.

Sorry, this is disrupting the Vote thread, but i feel that it
might be a key issue.

> Basically .xhtml will work exactly like xml works now. We could in fact 
> use the current .xml extensions, but xhtml has it's own extension and 
> media type, so I prefer to do as outlined above.

I do not quite understand the plan for our "xdocs" format.
Is that still the "intermediate format"? I was under the
impression that our xdocs schema was going to evolve to become
a subset of xhtml2. Are you suggesting that it will actually
*be* the full xhtml2?


View raw message