[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Plan B+1 = Plan C+1
- From: "Sean B. Palmer" <email@example.com>
- To: Jonathan Borden <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2001 22:50:58 +0000
> > http://infomesh.net/xncl/
> Sean, I can't connect to this, perhaps you've been /.'d ? :-)
Ugh, must be a server problem... Try again a bit later. All I did was swap
div for xncl:resource...
> Since we are modifying this spec, we assign a new namespace no?
No. Because the XHTML Basic specification defines it as being a modularized
XHTML family, technically we should follow the Modularization of XHTML
specification http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization which says we
should use the XHTML namespace, and make the *modifications* (i.e.
additions) in a different namespace.
The same goes for XLink: use the XLink namespace, otherwise technically it
isn't XLink. You have your own DTD, but you should be using it as an XHTML
Family (technicaly it's also incorrect if you didn't load all of the
modules onto your server: the HTML WG decided to use relative URIs instead
> I'm not understanding, what is "xhtml:type"?
The type atribute in HTML. BTW: http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml is the XHTML
namespace (for all m12n languages).
These comments are really just me being very pedantic and nit-picky - do
excuse me. I think what you've produced is great :-)
Sean B. Palmer
"Perhaps, but let's not get bogged down in semantics."
- Homer J. Simpson, BABF07.