* Mark Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-03-19 16:37]: > I believe the xhtml stuff is part of sgml-data. (Look in > /usr/share/sgml/html/dtd/xml/).
Hi Mark! Adam Di Carlo doesn't think so: (quoting from Bug #89217) "[...] It used to be included in sgml-data, but the maintainer (myself) felt that such packages should be included separately. XHTML 1.1 was dropped from sgml-data as of version 1.5.0." > I never use these, so I may be wrong, but it looks like the xhtml > version included with current sgml-data is 1.0 and not the modular > version 1.1. (or both) Yep, it's 1.0. > For the sake of consistency, then, XHTML 1.1 should probably be a part > of sgml-data, as well. Else XHTML would have to be split from > sgml-data, which is unlikely and, in any event, would be up to Adam > DiCarlo. Well, I think it would be sensible to provide a w3-dtd-xhtml containing all (1.0 and 1.1, that is) XHTML versions. But that split would be up to Adam Di Carlo and the packager, as you noted. > Seems like this should instead be a bug against sgml-data, and not an > RFP. No, see Bug #89217 > BTW, the docs for xhtml1.1 are in the doc-html-w3 package. Yes, I know. doc-html-w3 2001.10-1 incorrectly closed #89217. I wanted to reopen it but couldn't do so, because the bug was resolved for more than 28 days. So I basicly refiled this bug. So long, Silvestre
