W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > June 2005

RE: XHTML Modularization and Tables...

From: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@x-port.net>
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 10:49:00 +0100
Message-ID: <38131D48-AE79-45B1-86B7-44BA04A7575C@S009>
To: "'Boysko, Glenn'" <boysko@microstrategy.com>
Cc: <www-html@w3.org>
Hi Glenn,
 
That's an interesting one. Do you mind posting some sample mark-up? I'm
currently working with the XML Schemas for modularisation (partly in
relation to XForms and partly in relation to XHTML 2) so it would be
interesting to see your requirements.
 
Regards,
 
Mark
 

Mark Birbeck
CEO
x-port.net Ltd.

e: Mark.Birbeck@x-port.net
t: +44 (0) 20 7689 9232
w: http://www.formsPlayer.com/
b: http://internet-apps.blogspot.com/

Download our XForms processor from
http://www.formsPlayer.com/ 

 


  _____  

From: www-html-request@w3.org [mailto:www-html-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of
Boysko, Glenn
Sent: 31 May 2005 19:43
To: www-html@w3.org
Subject: XHTML Modularization and Tables...


Hello:

We are defining our own XML application and wish to integrate XHTML into it.
In particular, these XML tags provide dynamic scripting capabilities to
XHTML generation.
 
I have been successful in a base integration using the XHTML Modularization
spec 1.0.  The areas of problem have been introducing dynamic generation of
tables. In particular, the authors did not include any "hooks" to enable
foreign elements in between TABLE, THEAD, TR, TH, TD, etc.  As a result, our
DTD has to undefine the Tables module and redefine all of the rules to
include our elements.
 
I'm assuming that they felt it might have been too difficult to identify
where foreign elements might be "wired" into this DTD.
 
I see that the latest draft does not seem to address this either.
 
Is there any consensus on whether this is likely to be addressed in any
future specs?

Thanks,
Glenn Boysko
Received on Tuesday, 7 June 2005 09:49:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:19:03 UTC