Hi,
I'm a new Wicket user and am unclear about a couple of things regarding
what type of markup Wicket delivers to clients. Because some of the clients
I work with have government guidelines restricting what document types
are permitted (typically XHTML 1.0 Strict or Transitional), I'm concerned
I might not be able to use Wicket for those projects.
What I'll call "the Wicket XHTML DTD" is referenced as the XML namespace
URI for wicket documents. As (from what I've seen) there is no stated
DOCTYPE declaration, Wicket pages are expressed as well-formed XML only,
even though they could likely validate according to the Wicket XHTML DTD.
Unfortunately, for my applications I have a requirement to declare and be
valid according to a W3C XHTML 1.0 DTD.
It would seem from the unmodified comments found at the top of the Wicket
XHTML DTD that the schema used at first glance is XHTML 1.0 Strict, e.g.:
This DTD module is identified by the PUBLIC and SYSTEM identifiers:
PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
SYSTEM "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";
but on further investigation there have been modifications to the schema:
the addition of some "wicket:" prefixed attributes to %coreattrs;.
It's not industry practice to do that kind of thing, i.e., the header
comments should identify the schema being expressed. If a DTD is modified
the comments should be modified to relabel the schema. Any reference to
the FPI (formal public identifier) for XHTML 1.0 would likewise be
inappropriate since the Wicket schema has modified it. Even if the changes
occur in a new XML namespace the schema is no longer XHTML 1.0 Strict and
will not validate according to that DTD.
There are a few questions/comments that come from the above:
1. Are the wicket attributes required for Wicket-based processing?
Would removing them break existing functionality?
2. If the answer to #1 is no, could the web pages be run through a
simple XSLT transform to remove the non-XHTML attributes?
3. If the answer to #2 is yes, I'm willing to supply the XSLT
stylesheet, but I'm not on the developer team and couldn't based
on my current workload volunteer, so I wouldn't be able to supply
the code supporting that feature.
4. I am familiar with the XHTML modular DTDs and would be willing to
supply an XHTML 1.0 DTD based on a new Wicket module, then
"flattened" (converted into one file) based on some tools I've written.
This would be a replacement for the existing Wicket XHTML DTD and
be appropriately named, e.g.,
-//Apache.org//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict for Wicket 1.4//EN
This DTD could of course be used to validate Wicket-produced web
pages, but wouldn't be needed if the wicket: attributes were
stripped from generated web pages. Ideally, Wicket would produce
valid XHTML 1.0 Strict. I don't know if this is possible.
Some clarification on this would be most appreciated,
Thanks,
Ichiro
PS. on the whole I'm liking what I see with Wicket, esp. compared to
Spring's increasingly complex, arcane and fragile approach to what
should not be rocket science.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
