W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > August 2004

Re: suggest validator prefer URI to FPI

From: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 14:33:32 +0200
To: www-validator@w3.org
Message-ID: <4112291B.1B55@xyzzy.claranet.de>

Dan Connolly wrote:

> I'm interested to know if others find the arguments in
> http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#uri-benefits
> persuasive or not; i.e. whether they agree with me that
> the markup validation service should prefer URIs to FPIs.

I've always used the SGML library of the validator, e.g.
"http://validator.w3.org/sgml-lib/REC-xhtml1-20020801/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"

Just because I _thought_ that this is the best way to use
the validator:  It's either down or online, and if it's
online it should find its own SGML library... ;-)  After
reading Terje's answer here I guess that this assumption
was incorrect, and the URI for FPIs is irrelevant (?)

No, that's not true, the validator has some hardwired FPIs
like "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN", but it does
not know "-//W3C//ENTITIES Publishing for MathML 2.0//EN"
etc. without a corresponding URI.

But how is the validator supposed to check the URI against
the FPI if the URI doesn't contain the FPI ?  Apparently
it sometimes ignores the URI, and in other cases it ignores
the FPI,  In theory it could always use the FPI instead of
the URI for FPIs in its own library.  

Is this relevant ?  The exact number of my documents where
I need "unusual" FPIs is one.
                              Bye, Frank
Received on Thursday, 5 August 2004 08:35:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:14:08 UTC