Re: ReSpec: Intent to depracate XHTML 1.0 save support

Shane McCarron <[email protected]> Wed, 1 Jun 2016 06:41:01 -0500
Newsgroups gmane.org.w3c.specifications
Message-ID <CAJdbnOCRnVC1Y_RbrWwvkS_vt_jb5oPn21tBi_pjLZs=v7MVpA@mail.gmail.com>
Not quite.  XHTML+RDFa DEFINES a markup language - xhtml-rfda.  This is
based upon XHTML 1.0.  So we need to publish a version of the specification
that uses that markup language.

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 11:54 PM, Marcos Caceres <[email protected]> wrote:

> On June 1, 2016 at 2:17:56 AM, Michiel Bijl ([email protected]) wrote:
> > > On 16 May 2016, at 14:55, Shane McCarron wrote:
> > >
> > > It has an XHTML 1 version.
> >
> > But it has another version? Would it be feasible to forward the xhtml 1
> version to some
> > other version?
>
> My (terribly limited) understanding is that RDFa is tied to xhtml 1
> instead of xhtml 5, because there is no modern schema that one can
> validate xhtml+rdfa against. Otherwise, it would be possible to
> publish xhtml5+rdfa documents.
>
> Shane, is that correct?
>



-- 
Shane McCarron
Projects Manager, Spec-Ops