- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2010 12:22:39 -0800
- To: Joe D Williams <joedwil@earthlink.net>
- Cc: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>, 'Toby Inkster' <tai@g5n.co.uk>, 'Adam Barth' <w3c@adambarth.com>, 'HTML WG' <public-html@w3.org>
On Mar 1, 2010, at 11:57 AM, Joe D Williams wrote: >> no schema language can capture all the conformance requirements of >> XHTML5. > > maybe so, because some requirements are runtime. Henri's not talking about runtime requirements. The static machine- checkable syntax conformance requirements of HTML5 cannot be fully and correctly expressed in any of the existing popular schema languages. > If we can't produce a valid (highly informative) XML Schema that can > accurately represent the authortime syntax and sctructure > requirements, then there will be no firm standards-track crosscheck > between authortime content structures, the intent of the standard, > and the runtime of the operating browser. The crosscheck would be to use the validator. If you want a schema that approximates most of the requirements, validator.nu includes a RelaxNG schema that anyone could use for their own purposes. But it should not be assumed that any content satisfying this schema is correct. My understanding is that DTDs and XML Schema are both significantly weaker than Relax NG and can represent even fewer of the requirements accurately. Regards, Maciej
Received on Monday, 1 March 2010 20:23:13 UTC