Liam R E Quin scripsit:
> > So an XHTML DOCTYPE might look like any of these:
> [1]
> > <!DOCTYPE html SYSTEM "../dtds/mini-html.dtd">
>
> [2]
> > <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"
> > "../dtds/standard-html.dtd">
>
> [3]
> > <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
> > "../dtds/standard-html.dtd">
>
> Or even <!DOCTYPE html> as it turns out.
>
> However, if you give both SYSTEM and PUBLIC, the PUBLIC identifier can
> be tignored, whereas the system identifier cannot be ignored:
The above is a contrafactual version of XML in which system ids can be
anything with local meaning, whereas public ids are either FPIs or URIs.
>
> [[
> An XML processor attempting to retrieve the entity's content may use any
> The XML spec also (indirectly) gives parsers license to use xml:base for
> resolving system identifiers, for what it's worth.
I believe that's incorrect. The scope of xml:base is at most the root
element, and DOCTYPE declarations are outside the root element.
--
You are a child of the universe no less John Cowan
than the trees and all other acyclic http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
graphs; you have a right to be here.
--DeXiderata by Sean McGrath
