This document:Public document·View comments·Disposition of Comments·
Nearby:Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group Other specs in this tool Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group's Issue tracker
Quick access to LC-1690 LC-1691 LC-1692 LC-1693 LC-1694 LC-1695 LC-1696 LC-1697 LC-1698 LC-1699 LC-1700 LC-1701 LC-1702 LC-1703 LC-1704 LC-1705 LC-1706 LC-1707 LC-1708 LC-1709 LC-1710 LC-1711 LC-1712 LC-1713 LC-1714 LC-1715 LC-1716 LC-1717 LC-1718 LC-1719 LC-1720 LC-1721 LC-1722 LC-1723 LC-1724 LC-1725 LC-1726 LC-1727 LC-1728 LC-1729 LC-1730 LC-1731 LC-1732 LC-1733 LC-1734 LC-1735 LC-1736 LC-1737 LC-1738 LC-1739 LC-1740 LC-1741 LC-1742 LC-1743 LC-1744 LC-1745 LC-1746 LC-1747 LC-1748 LC-1749 LC-1750 LC-1751 LC-1752 LC-1753 LC-1754 LC-1755 LC-1756 LC-1757 LC-1758 LC-1759 LC-1760 LC-1761 LC-1762 LC-1763 LC-1764 LC-1765 LC-1766 LC-1767 LC-1781 LC-1782 LC-1783 LC-1786
Previous: LC-1732 Next: LC-1714
I'm just catching up on this thread: The reason the mobileOK doc says nothing about the namespace is that Dom said ages ago (and consistently with his previous message on this thread) that the DTD has the value as FIXED. Consequently, failing if the namespace is absent not right. The specs all say that the namespace declaration should be present. So I suggest we go back, amend the mobileOK doc, and FAIL if a namespace declaration is not present on the html element. Jo > -----Original Message----- > From: public-mobileok-checker-request@w3.org [mailto:public-mobileok- > checker-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Roland Gülle > Sent: 25 July 2007 18:52 > To: Dominique Hazael-Massieux > Cc: Sean Owen; public-mobileok-checker > Subject: Re: F2F demo: html / xhtml namespace > > > > > In terms of the checker, I think this means we should default a root > > element whose name is "html" and has no defined namespace to be in the > > XHTML namespace (so that we can parse is as if it was XHTML), while > > throwing an error to the user - I thought there was a specific error > > triggered in mobileOK for this, but I don't see it in there in a quick > > read. > +1 to your proposed solution and found also nothing about XHTML > namespaces in the mobileOK basic doc. > > roland > > >