Re: Status of XMLSpec and related materials

Hi Norman, thanks for replying,

Le 13 déc. 2004, à 10:46, Norman Walsh a écrit :
> | It seems there's no recent tutorial for XMLSPec [3] and there's no
> | "fake" document as a test suite to show the input markup and the
> | output markup.
>
> True. Eve last did proper documentation years ago and there's been
> drift since then. Alas, there are only so many hours in the week.

OK I will read first the documentation, and I will try to make a new 
one and I will ask you what I'm missing into it.
	*starting reading process...*

> | My questions/comments:
> | 	- I am inclined to help on the XHTML output of XMLSpec (I'm
> | not a top-gun XSLT creator but I have notions and at least for XHTML
> | markup semantics I have very good knowledge)
>
> Ok, but do so by editing the *HTML* stylesheet. The XHTML version is
> automatically generated from that.

	hmmm :/ ok Then I will adopt HTML 4.01 strict that would be fully 
compatible with XHTML 1.0 Strict (and/or maybe XHTML 1.1 which would 
mean drop "name" for "id" only.)

> | 	- I proposed to create a fake document covering all cases of
> | XMLSpec, and that will constitute a kind of test suite for the style
> | sheet.
>
> That would be good too. Note, however, that lots of folks who use
> XMLSpec wind up writing their own extensions.

Yes :) but if we have a good test document that would be easier to 
associate a kind of
	select="document('test-doc-with-your-own-extension.xml')"

> | Does it seem reasonable or am I putting my feet in the plate of
> | someone else?
>
> I'm happy for the help. If you are going to make significant markup
> changes, please float them first so we can chat about it. There is a
> fair amount of legacy. :-)

And that for sure. I don't want holy wars nor dictatorship on the XSLT, 
I just want we improve things collectively. :)



-- 
Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***