- From: Henrik Dvergsdal <henrik.dvergsdal@hibo.no>
- Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2007 10:20:29 +0200
- To: public-html@w3.org
On Apr 13, 2007, at 23:58, Ian Hickson wrote: >> This means, in practice, that standard conformance will be >> administered >> by a number of third party vendors who will use different technologies >> and specification techniques of their own choice to check documents. > > Yup, just like browsers use different technologies and specification > techniques of their own choice to render documents. Thanks agian for some really thorough and useful answers. However, as a developer I don't like the idea of being dependend on proprietary blackboxes for validation. Today I can just pick up an xml parser, the xhtml DTD and then validate XHTML markup just as I validate any other XML document. (I haven't tried it with HTML, but I guess there are also some SGML parsers around.) The same goes for authoring tools. I think It would be good for the web to have schema driven authoring tools that could allways refer to the latest version of a normative HTML5 schema - even if they miss out some aspects of the language. In my view, you should have really some compelling reasons for not not defining HTML5 by means of a schema. Could you be a little more specific on this? So far I've heard that this is about failure of XML schemas to represent complex attribute syntax. Is this really a big problem? Would it be possible to fix this in XML? -- Henrik
Received on Saturday, 14 April 2007 08:20:27 UTC