- From: Marcos Caceres <m.caceres@qut.edu.au>
- Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 08:33:21 +1000
- To: "Henrik Dvergsdal" <henrik.dvergsdal@hibo.no>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
> Strictly speaking, HTML will not be a formal language defined by the > text in the HTML5 document. It will be a more loosely defined entity, > ultimately bounded by actual implementations of browsers and checkers. > Henrik, this is an open process and you are invited to write your own schema for HTML5 in whatever formal language you want (or even invent your own schema/formal language). Instead of asking for more features, just take it upon yourself to do it. Henri Sivonen built the conformance checker service himself and was presumedly not asked by the WHATWG to do it. Everyone on the list knows why theoretically a formal schema might be good. Hixie, Henri and other have repeatedly shown that the theory is limited (ie. DTD validation) and that English prose is just fine. If you want to convince us of your arguments then just build a schema, create a web service, and create some good test cases that actually proves to the group that what you want is useful. Who knowns, you might come up with something really worthwhile! I'm sure if you do, the editor will be more than happy to consider putting it into the spec or could be published as a separate note (once it goes through the scrutiny of the WG, of course). If you manage to build a schema that has value beyond giving a silly validity badge, then I think people would really consider it of value. Kind regards, -- Marcos Caceres http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Tuesday, 17 April 2007 22:33:27 UTC