Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote:
David Hucklesby wrote:
The validator still needs a DTD though.
If you mean the W3C validator, then no, it just got experimental
HTML5 support.
And the W3C validator misinterprets XHTML5 to be "some lesser XHTML
flavor"...
<http://qa-dev.w3.org/wmvs/HEAD/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gunlaug.no%2Fxhtml5-en.xhtml>
...so it is a bit too experimental to be of practical use today.
The <http://html5.validator.nu/> validator OTOH gets it right...
<http://html5.validator.nu/?doc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gunlaug.no%2Fxhtml5-en.xhtml&showimagereport=yes&showsource=yes>
...and is also useful for checking details.
The W3C validator "gets" HTML5 alright, but I'm not sure if it gets it
right...
<http://qa-dev.w3.org/wmvs/HEAD/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gunlaug.no%2Fhtml5-en.html>
...since the <http://html5.validator.nu/> comes to another conclusion...
<http://html5.validator.nu/?doc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gunlaug.no%2Fhtml5-en.html&showimagereport=yes&showsource=yes>
...obviously because I've left the xml declaration in there.
So, the future doesn't change the HTML vs. XHTML-XML relations, or lack
of same. We will still have one standard, that can be applied to the web
in (at least) two different ways...
<http://www.w3.org/QA/2008/01/html5-is-html-and-xml.html>
...if they don't change something in the xHTML5 spec in the near future.
Of course, only HTML can be widely used, as long as XHTML isn't
supported by the most used browser.
regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
