- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 11:11:35 -0400
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <m2aa95q63c.fsf@nwalsh.com>
At the 13 Oct telcon, we agreed that adding section 7 to the spec resolved this issue. "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk> writes: > Further to discussion last month, I've looked at this, and I think in > fact the right thing to say is, it's orthogonal. That is, insofar as > this spec. is focussed on the _information content_ of the data model > constructed per the various profiles, we already cover the _impact_ of > validation (it only affects the [element content whitespace] property > of CIIs) at that level. > > On the other hand, I think it would be entirely reasonable to add a > Note to section 6, Conformance, along these lines > > Note: Validation against a DTD or other schema is almost entirely > orthogonal to the data model concerns this specification addresses. > It is open to any specification which references this one in a > conformance statement to include wording requiring (or indeed > forbidding) validation of one or more varieties. > > ht > -- > Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh > 10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440 > Fax: (44) 131 651-1426, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk > URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/ > [mail from me _always_ has a .sig like this -- mail without it is forged spam] Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh Lead Engineer MarkLogic Corporation Phone: +1 413 624 6676 www.marklogic.com
Received on Thursday, 13 October 2011 15:12:22 UTC