Re: Random thoughts on modularization of validator(s)

Trying to follow-up on loose threads I should not have abandoned so 
fast.

On Jul 20, 2004, at 20:35, Nick Kew wrote:
>> seems to point towards something more complicated [insert vague
>> ramblings on dividing and processing parallel validation, using trendy
>> acronyms e.g NRL, DSDL - I am yet to investigate these fields
>> further.]. Should we aim at doing that too?
>
> Huh?

There is some ongoing work with apparently potentially important 
consequences for XML validation. Since we're talking m12n, and 
eventually splitting xml and sgml validation, this is something at 
leaat worth keeping on our radar. For example:
	http://www.xmlhack.com/read.php?item=2125

(warning - acronyms ad nauseum)
-- 
olivier