- 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