22 2002-10-25 02:55:04 +0000 Custom DTDs always treated as SGML (vs. XML). 2008-12-02 22:42:33 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified Validator check 0.6.0b1 All All RESOLVED FIXED P2 normal 1.0 739 1500 1 link ot zzz www-validator-cvs oldest_to_newest 24 0 link 2002-10-25 02:55:04 +0000 Reported by Klaus Johannes Rusch: The beta validator at http://validator.w3.org:8001/ indicates the following document is not valid: <!DOCTYPE html SYSTEM "http://www.ibm.com/data/dtd/v11/ibmxhtml1-transitional.dtd"> [...] Any ideas why this is failing (the validator seems to not allow XHTML notation with custom DTDs, validating the same document against the W3C XHTML DTD works). 94 1 link 2002-10-27 11:30:06 +0000 When a document with a custom DTD (not a "Well Known" FPI) is served as text/html it will always be treated as SGML and not XML. This is hard to avoid, at least in the current code. To enable custom XML DTDs you need to use an XML Content-Type. Setting target to 0.7.0 to investigate this again at that time. 125 2 link 2002-10-30 23:35:13 +0000 As per the further comments from Klaus Johannes Rusch, perhaps we should add a "Force XML Mode" setting to allow the "We must have text/html for the older browsers" crowd to use custom XML DTDs. 2214 3 link 2004-09-01 16:46:08 +0000 Retarget for 1.0. Won't make the cut for 0.7. 3894 4 sam 2005-03-11 04:15:43 +0000 The following page sets Content-type to application/xml, and uses a custom DTD, but still doesn't validate. http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fdev.silverstripe.com%2Fplay%2Fcustom-dtd.php An alternative validator succeeds in validating it: http://www.htmlhelp.com/cgi-bin/validate.cgi?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdev.silverstripe.com%2Fplay%2Fcustom-dtd.html&xml=yes 3895 5 sam 2005-03-11 04:19:56 +0000 It doesn't work with text/xml either :P 11314 6 ot 2006-08-30 02:50:41 +0000 This looks very similar to the problem described in Bug #1500, where it is argued that the sgml/xml mode switch should be based on content-type, before pre-parsing, and not based on pre-parsing and detection of a known (or unknown in this case) doctype. Setting dependency accordingly. 14457 7 ot 2007-03-16 06:57:20 +0000 There were some problems in the logic of the parse mode detection, which indeed did not properly take into account the media type in choosing a parse mode for documents with unknown document types (including custom DTDs). Fixed now in CVS: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-validator-cvs/2007Mar/0092.html 14464 8 ot 2007-03-16 12:55:15 +0000 rewriting the parse mode selection routine entirely fixes this. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-validator-cvs/2007Mar/0095.html has the CVS diff for the refactoring. The logic goes: * if neither content type nor doctype are helpful, => throw warning, use SGML as fallback * in case of an unknown doctype but useful mime type (generally, XML mime type) => follow the mime type * in case of an ambiguous mime type (text/html) but well-known doctype (any HTML served as text/html...) => follow the doctype * if neither are ambiguous, but they collide => throw warning, follow the mime type This was tested with the documents in the catalogue, documents outside the catalogue (custom DTDs), document served with the wrong mime type (XHTML 1.1 as text/html, html 4.01 as application/xhtml+xml etc.) successfully, see: http://qa-dev.w3.org/wmvs/HEAD/dev/tests/ Considering this fixed. If reopening, please provide clear test cases, thank you.