- From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 16:12:39 -0400
- To: w3c-xml-cg@w3.org
- Cc: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
As part of the "RDF in HTML" taskforce, I've been trying to understand if there are any existing commitments towards delivering entity like functionality without reliance upon DTDs. My conclusion from [1] is: Consequently, it appears the Schema WG has a pending action to satisfy the HTML WG, and the Core WG has a pending requirement for XHTML 2.0. Absent the explicit designation of resources to furtherer this issue, I simply expect many formats (e.g., HTML, MathML) will continue to rely upon DTDs. Consequently, could the XML CG provide me any guidance/expectations for dates associated with: 1. an XML 2.0 that satisfies this requirement, or 2. of any plans to work on an element set for common character entities (from the Schema WG or otherwise). Thanks! [1] http://www.w3.org/2003/03/rdf-in-xml.html 1. Possible ACTION XML Core or XML Schema WG: develop a specification (of XML or XML Schema) that specifies a feature akin to character entities without DTDs. This would permit the HTML WG to move towards relying upon alternative schema languages (e.g., XML Schema and RelaxNG) that would then be more permissive with respect to including foreign XML (including embedded RDF 1.0 serializations). The following history was investigated to determine if any existing commitments are pending (most links are to Member only resources): + In May 2000 Steven Pemberton (for HTML WG) [36]asked the Schema WG to "include a facility to define at least character entities." + In October 2000 Don Mullen (for XML Schema WG) [37]declined and suggested two work-arounds "specify entities in an entity-only DTD" or "use markup such as <eacute/> instead of é" and that the WG greed by "majority vote to instruct the chairs to take this issue to the XML CG for consideration as a possible candidate requirement for XML 2.0." + In October 2000 Steven Pemberton (for HTML WG) objected "The HTML working group has instructed me to forward their dissent from your WG's decision, and to ask you to send the issue for review by the director. The group is unhappy with the idea that a user agent would have to be able to process schemas as well as DTD fragments, when an aim of schemas was to replace DTDs." + In October 2000 the [38]Director Review meeting "RESOLVED: Uphold the decision that this problem need not be solved in XML Schema part 1/2. However, XML Schema WG must ensure that this issue is resolved. It may be solved in a future version of XML Schema spec, in a separate spec, or by another WG (or by persuading the world that it's not really a problem that needs solving). [MSM laughs humorlessly.]" However, no progress has been made. + In June 2002 Steven Pemberton (for HTML WG) noted these difficulties again and a [39]request was forwarded to the Core WG. + In October 2002, the XML Core WG declared [40]that the existing methods of DTD reliance are sufficient. + In October 2002, the HTML WG was [41]confounded. Consequently, it appears the Schema WG has a pending action to satisfy the HTML WG, and the Core WG has a pending requirement for XHTML 2.0. Absent the explicit designation of resources to investigate this issue, I simply expect many formats (e.g., HTML, MathML) will continue to rely upon DTDs.
Received on Wednesday, 16 July 2003 16:12:40 UTC