Ooooooooooooookay, where'd you read that? Citation please.
You see, what some people don't seem to realize--right up until they work with XML--is that the Document Type Definition performs a very important function that has never been performed by anything else, not schemas, not the HTML5 doctype.
HTML Code:
<!DOCTYPE svg PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD SVG 1.1//EN" "http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/1.1/DTD/svg11.dtd" [
<!ENTITY deg "°">
<!ENTITY oq "“">
<!ENTITY cq "”">
]>
That's an SVG 1.1 Doctype that I used in a page--but do you see something odd about it? Here's the original:
Code:
<!DOCTYPE svg PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD SVG 1.1//EN" "http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/1.1/DTD/svg11.dtd">
Here's the one I used:
Code:
<!DOCTYPE svg PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD SVG 1.1//EN" "http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/1.1/DTD/svg11.dtd" [
<!ENTITY deg "°">
<!ENTITY oq "“">
<!ENTITY cq "”">
]>
Character Entity References!
XHTML 1.0 links to a document type definition, which defines these,;XHTML5 does NOT, so you have to go through the effort of memorizing their numerical equivalents or skip any characters you can't type on your keyboard altogether.
Doing something like
HTML Code:
<!DOCTYPE html [<!--CERs Here-->]>
will cause the validator to throw errors, because now it's expecting the COMPLETE document type definition (I've written them. Even ElementML was surprisingly long). SVG has no character entity references, but
because of its doctype's structure I was able to add some in.
HTML5's doctype doesn't allow that, and if you don't have a doctype at all, you're out of luck. Oh, I know, "You don't need a doctype" and yadda yadda yadda, but here's a point I made in my book:
- √
- √
- √
They all amount to the same thing, but which do you want to use for writing "(X)HTML5=√(All Headaches)"?
