- From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 06:58:16 -0600
- To: Thierry Michel <tmichel@w3.org>,public-webcgm-wg@w3.org
Hi Thierry, I basically agree with you: it is out of scope for this review. It would be a large amount of work to do this, and would heavily impact the schedule, which has already slipped too much. I think, in the worst case, it could end up essentially requiring a rewrite of Ch.4. I also tend to think there may be some merit to the idea, had it been brought up earlier. (E.g., during "Requirements" phase, or a year ago at latest (CS review / 1st WD review). We should (and will) have a full discussion in the full WG, of course. I particularly want to understand his comment about Namespace. It might be interesting to see if someone would like to write a Relax NG schema as a side project -- to be a technical article, but not a normative part of 2.1 at this time. If it works out well and people like it, then perhaps it could be added to the REC/OS in a quick future Amendment, rather than delaying 2.1 further. Thoughts, others? -Lofton. p.s. Dave & I looked at the CSS question and wrote a paper, long ago: http://www.cgmopen.org/webcgm/readings.html http://www.cgmopen.org/technical/stylable_cgm_submitted_0324.pdf At 01:45 PM 6/22/2009 +0200, Thierry Michel wrote: >Here is our first LC comment. >Unfortunately this comment seem to be out of scope, as we are requesting >comments only on the differences between this second Last Call Working >Draft and the First Public and Last Call Working Draft. > >For XML Schema and/or Relax NG schema, unless someone wants to provide one ;-) >we should probably say that yes it is a good idea, but we don't have the >ressource for such work and it is not required by the W3C to release such >Schema. > >Thoughts ? > >Thierry > > > >Innovimax SARL wrote: >>Dear, >>First congratulations for your 2.1 version >>I want to spot some improvement that I wanted to be incorporated in this >>version >>== moving forward with XML Schema or Relax NG == >>Sticking to DTD to define a XML dialect is neither sufficient neither >>a way to widespread the use of this XML dialect. For that, I ask the >>WG to consider providing normative XML Schema and/or Relax NG schema >>of the XCF model. It will help adoption especially because XCF uses >>Namespaces. >>== interaction between WebCGM and CSS == >>Is it possible to consider the role that could play CSS vis à vis WebCGM ? >>Regards, >>Mohamed ZERGAOUI >> > > >
Received on Monday, 22 June 2009 12:59:15 UTC