This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
Hi, I am trying to develop a page using XHTML Basic 1.1. When I check the above page I get the following results page: http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mutah.com%2Fv3%2Findex.html With these errors coming up: Unknown Parse Mode! The MIME Media Type (text/html) for this document is used to serve both SGML and XML based documents, and it is not possible to disambiguate it based on the DOCTYPE Declaration in your document. Parsing will continue in SGML mode. Namespace Found in non-XML Document Namespace "" found, but document type is not XML! This page is not Valid -//W3C//DTD XHTML Basic 1.1//EN! Below are the results of attempting to parse this document with an SGML parser. 1. Error Line 6 column 220: character data is not allowed here. ...classifieds and extensive library!" /> You have used character data somewhere it is not permitted to appear. Mistakes that can cause this error include putting text directly in the body of the document without wrapping it in a container element (such as a <p>aragraph</p>) or forgetting to quote an attribute value (where characters such as "%" and "/" are common, but cannot appear without surrounding quotes). Is this a bug? Or Am I doing something wrong? Thanks.
Hello Ali, (In reply to comment #0) > I am trying to develop a page using XHTML Basic 1.1. > > When I check the above page I get the following results page: http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mutah.com%2Fv3%2Findex.html > > Is this a bug? Or Am I doing something wrong? You are doing nothing terribly wrong. :) What is happening is: * you are using XHTML Basic 1.1, which the validator does not have (yet) in its internal catalog. * because the document type is unknown to the validator, it looks at other information, and finds that your document is served as text/html. hence "OK, it must be some kind of classic HTML". * the validator parses your XHTML as classic HTML and gets all confused by all this apparent XML stuff in a document that supposedly isn't. Morality: you should have served your XHTML content as application/xhtml+xml. Serving it as text/html is tolerable for XHTML 1.0 authored according to http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#guidelines but for XHTML Basic 1.1 it's really not recommended. In any case, many thanks for your report. I'm going to add XHTML Basic 1.1 as a known document type and everything should be working soon. Thank you, olivier
now fixed in HEAD, will add some test cases and close.