[Tools-discuss] Re: rfcmarkup changes

[Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de>]

Julian Reschke wrote:
 
> This seems to be incorrect (see for instance
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/dtds.html#a_dtd_XHTML-1.0-Strict#dtdentry_xhtml1-strict.dtd_style>).

Oh, yes, also for <style> and <script>, not only <pre>, I tend
to forget those two because I don't use them.  With the same
restriction as for <pre>, the xml:space="preserved" can't be
modified.

In another message (h7 / h8 / h9):  ACK, the rfcmarkup output
should be valid, it's not that we disagree about everything ;-)

In a third message about XHTML and CSS in general:

> I think it's perfectly reasonable to use CSS in a way that's
> compatible with the almost all user agents *in use*.

Disabling CSS for testing is a remommended WAI technique.  If
you end up with something that simply doesn't work without CSS
it's not only some stoneage browsers which might be affected,
it could also hurt state of the art mobile devices.  

Admittedly I've no clear idea how to define "original RFC look
and feel" wrt mobile devices.

> The markup is generated by a script (not a human), and 
> consumed by user agents (not humans). (No, I don't argue the
> benefits of XHTML over HTML, I just don't see those *here*).

You're the author of tools doing interesting stuff with XML -
do these tools also work with similar SGML ?  The one time I
tried to parse XHTML "manually" (writing a script) I was very
happy that it was "only" XHTML and not HTML.

Bye, Frank



_______________________________________________
Tools-discuss mailing list
Tools-discuss at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss