- From: Dave Hollander <dmh@hpsgml.fc.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 14:37:24 -0600
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
> Paul Grosso wrote: > > Now the point is that mydoc is well-formed, but can't be valid > because there is no DTD. But there is a DTD for the subtree > defined by the <f> element, and it might very well be important > that that subtree does validate against its DTD (because my > equation processor requires only valid AAP-marked up input). > What you can have are what I call "islands of validity" in > a well-formed document. "islands of validity": An interesting concept. I have often observed that in the past I have tried to impose validity on entire corpus when there was only a small part that I was really interested in being valid, as extended beyond the well-formed requirements. Indeed, when I look at html and validation, it really is only a small portion of our web pages that I am really concerned about, specifically forms and meta-data, the rest I just want to parse cleanly. What about the other side of the coin, if there is a DTD for mydoc, but not for formula, can you have a valid document with an opaque bubble? Is there any way to make this a SGML valid concept? If the mydoc DTD had formula as any would be be ok? <Tagent-question> How is validation with ANYDTD interesting? Only for the smart editor? </Tagent-question> Dave _________________________________________________________________ Dave Hollander Hewlett-Packard Intranet Architect 3404 E. Harmony Road, MS. 6U68 TIS/WebCOE Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 dmh@corp.hp.com 970-229-3192 __________________________________________________________________
Received on Thursday, 19 June 1997 16:46:22 UTC