Dear Sir, dear Madam,
 
I'm responding to your well established FAQ (http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2004/xhtml-faq) section 12 (Does Microsoft Internet Explorer accept the media type application/xhtml+xml?)
 
In short a printout from my "index.html" to make it easier to understand.
 
[ index.html ]
 
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href=""mailto:./database/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/style/xsl/dtd.xsl">./database/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/style/xsl/dtd.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
  "
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html xmlns="
http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en-US" xml:lang="en-US">
 
 
Now the modifierd "copy.xsl" (renamed to dtd.xsl here!)
 
[dtd.xsl]
 
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<xsl:stylesheet version="1.0"
  xmlns:xsl="
http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform"
  xmlns:fo="
http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Format">
 <xsl:template match="/">
  <copy-of select="."/>
 </xsl:template>
</xsl:stylesheet>
 
 
My question is, if my version of that XSL-file is better formed than yours. As you have probably noticed I was including a new line at first. Furthermore I included the FO namespace. Any changes made by me are marked in red.
 
Lastly I'd like to know if the "lang="en-US" xml:lang="en-US"" specification within the <html>-tag is well formed.
 
 
Yours sincerely, J.C.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       -------------------- Cert Version III @ T-D.ORG Network --------------------
                    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
mIRC:    #[T-D] (QN)
 
eMail:    info@tron-delta.de
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
News / Info / Notes:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

Reply via email to