[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: Plan B+1 = Plan C+1

• From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@m...>
• To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@m...>
• Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2001 19:12:46 -0500

Sean B. Palmer wrote:
>
> 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.

You are absolutely correct. I've modified xcat-xhtml.dtd to reflect this.
The resource element is qualified by the
http://www.openhealth.org/XMLCatalog/ namespace.

Thanks for clarifying this.


> > I'm not understanding, what is "xhtml:type"?
>
> The type atribute in HTML.

Aha, Uche suggested that we rename this to "content-type" which I have done
on the "resource" element. I'm not too particular which attribute name is
used, perhaps we can vote.

	<resource content-type="text/dtd+xml" ...> vs.
	<resource type="text/dtd+xml" ...>

Jonathan

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Plan B+1 = Plan C+1
    • From: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@m...>

• References:
  • Re: Plan B+1 = Plan C+1
    • From: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Plan B+1 = Plan C+1
• Next by Date: questions re WD-xml-infoset-20001220
• Previous by thread: Re: Plan B+1 = Plan C+1
• Next by thread: Re: Plan B+1 = Plan C+1
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread