RE: Using existing staff.xml based tests with HTML processors

Actually that's the link to the original m12n framework files with which I played with. Files in the zip I've send are not in there.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mary Brady [mailto:mbrady@nist.gov] 
> Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 5:07 PM
> To: Dimitris Dimitriadis
> Cc: www-dom-ts@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Using existing staff.xml based tests with HTML processors
> 
> 
> Hi Dimitris,
> 
> The link that Manos provided is the link to the
> files -- they are all contained in a subdirectory --
> if you unzip them into tests/level1/core/files --
> you'll be able to see them.
> 
> --Mary
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dimitris Dimitriadis" <dimitris@ontologicon.com>
> To: "Manos Batsis" <m.batsis@bsnet.gr>
> Cc: "Mary Brady" <mbrady@nist.gov>; <www-dom-ts@w3.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 9:49 AM
> Subject: Re: Using existing staff.xml based tests with HTML processors
> 
> 
> > Thanks Manos
> >
> > We don't have an area for upload, so I think the best would 
> be if you
> > sent the zipped file to interested parties (I am one).
> >
> > /Dimitris
> >
> > On Monday, March 11, 2002, at 11:21 , Manos Batsis wrote:
> >
> > > Where can I upload or send this? I can't just post it to 
> the list; I've
> > > used the directory structure as found in [1], ended up with 2.2 MB
> > > (unzipped).
> > >
> > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-xhtml-m12n-
> > > schema-20011219/xhtml-m12n-schema.zip
> > >
> > > Manos
> > >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: Mary Brady [mailto:mbrady@nist.gov]
> > >> Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 3:00 PM
> > >> To: Manos Batsis
> > >> Cc: www-dom-ts@w3.org
> > >> Subject: Re: Using existing staff.xml based tests with 
> HTML processors
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Can you take a look at the existing files, under
> > >> /level1/core/files and give it a try?
> > >>
> > >> --Mary
> > >>
> > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > >> From: "Manos Batsis" <m.batsis@bsnet.gr>
> > >> To: "Mary Brady" <mbrady@nist.gov>
> > >> Cc: <www-dom-ts@w3.org>
> > >> Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 7:49 AM
> > >> Subject: RE: Using existing staff.xml based tests with 
> HTML processors
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> From: Mary Brady [mailto:mbrady@nist.gov]
> > >>>
> > >>>> Would this approach require that all processors would
> > >> have to support
> > >>>> XHTML Modularization?
> > >>>
> > >>> XHTML m12n is not something that a processor supports
> > >> explicitly; as with
> > >> any XML vocabulary, it depends on your needs.
> > >>>
> > >>> A browser for example can display an extended XHTML
> > >> document by treating
> > >> known XHTML elements as usual while determining the display
> > >> of the rest
> > >> based on style (CSS) or some default handling rules (i.e.
> > >> display the text
> > >> contained in them). Validation is not mandatory.
> > >>>
> > >>> Something more critical can validate such a document using
> > >> a DTD or Schema
> > >> that contains the XHTML modules along with the custom modules.
> > >>>
> > >>> With m12n, you can use one file to perform HTML 
> dependent tests (for
> > >> example using HTML specific collections such as
> > >> document.forms) or raw XML
> > >> tests to non XHTML elements included in such a file while the
> > >> file is valid
> > >> (either as XML or XHTML).
> > >>>
> > >>> Kindest regards,
> > >>>
> > >>> Manos
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> --Mary
> > >>>>
> > >>>> ----- Original Message -----
> > >>>> From: "Manos Batsis" <m.batsis@bsnet.gr>
> > >>>> To: <bv@opera.no>; "Arnold, Curt" <Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com>
> > >>>> Cc: <www-dom-ts@w3.org>
> > >>>> Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 6:48 AM
> > >>>> Subject: RE: Using existing staff.xml based tests with
> > >> HTML processors
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> XHTML test files must be valid to be XHTML in the first
> > >>>> place; technically
> > >>>> speaking though, there is a way to have valid XHTML just
> > >> by adding a
> > >>>> 'wrapper'[1] to the existing files while using XHTML
> > >>>> Modularization (either
> > >>>> in XML Schema [1] or DTD [2]). I would be very interested
> > >> to help if
> > >>>> something like that is chosen, especially if XML Schema
> > >> is involved.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> [1] like
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> <!DOCTYPE  bla>
> > >>>>> <html xmlns="myDomain/bla">
> > >>>>>    <head>
> > >>>>>       <title>
> > >>>>>          Untitled
> > >>>>>       </title>
> > >>>>>    </head>
> > >>>>>    <body>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> <!-- existing XML content -->
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>    </body>
> > >>>>> </html>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-xhtml-m12n-schema-20011219/
> > >>>>> [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Kindest regards,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Manos
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>>>> From: Bjørn Vermo [mailto:bv@opera.no]
> > >>>>>> Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 1:40 PM
> > >>>>>> To: 'www-dom-ts@w3.org'; Arnold, Curt
> > >>>>>> Subject: Re: Using existing staff.xml based tests with
> > >>>> HTML processors
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> 2002-03-06 18:36:21, "Arnold, Curt"
> > >>>> <Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> I was thinking that you could produce an close [X]HTML
> > >>>>>> analogue of staff.xml
> > >>>>>>> by doing a direct translation of each element in staff to a
> > >>>>>> distinct [X]HTML
> > >>>>>>> element with a similar content model.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Most of the elements simply contain PCDATA and have no
> > >>>>>> attributes, so you
> > >>>>>>> could make <employeeId> to <code> and <salary> to <pre>, etc
> > >>>>>> and could
> > >>>>>>> change <address domestic="">something</address> to <a
> > >>>>>> href="">something</a>,
> > >>>>>>> <employee> could go to <p>.  The only structural change
> > >>>> that would be
> > >>>>>>> changing <staff> to <html><body>.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I believe it would be more useful to use constructs like <div
> > >>>>>> class="employeeid"> and <a class="domestic" href=2xx">
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> --
> > >>>>>> Bjørn Vermo
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
> >
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 13 March 2002 06:33:20 UTC