Comments on XHTML + MathML + SVG Profile

Comments on:

An XHTML + MathML + SVG Profile
W3C Working Draft
9 August 2002

Colleagues:

We congratulate you on your work and hope our comments and suggestions 
are helpful.  Please get back to us if you have any questions or if further
discussion seems likely to be helpful.

Since your specification is completely DTD-based, the XML Schema WG has
little expertise to contribute.  We believe such a profile would be
unnecessary if the three modules supported XML Schema.  As you are probably
aware, XML Schema provides explicit support for definition of
namespace-qualified vocabularies, and for using such vocabularies in
combination.  We recognize that this proposal meets an important need for
those who require or prefer DTDs, but we believe it might be appropriate to
at least signal the potential advantages of using XML schema.  Of course, we
would be delighted if you would in fact develop and include such a schema.

Suggestion: If you decide not to take our suggestion and include a  schema,
we recommend that you change the name of the specification to include the
term "Document Type Declaration" or if you prefer, "DTD", perhaps instead of
"Profile".  Afterall, the only normative section of the specification is
Section 2, which describes the DTD.

Suggestion: Expand upon the introductory text relating to XML Schema:

    The possibility of combining those modules written in XML
    Schema [XMLSchema] might be explored when XML Schemas for
    XHTML [XHTMLMODSchema] and others become available and mature.

Add an indication that an instance document written against this 
profile is expected to also validate using the XML Schema of each module
without any additional effort to combine the schemas.

xan

On behalf of XML Schema WG (w3c-xml-schema-wg@w3.org)

Xan Gregg
TIBCO Software, Inc.
www.tibco.com

Received on Thursday, 29 May 2003 15:03:49 UTC