Re: Question for Implementors (Was: Schema Validation Transform)

And a test with an explicit inline schema. Untested, etc.

WRT the PR review comment, it seems inconsistent that we say
*don't* schema validate, but *maybe* DTD validate. I know
that this has been a question from at least one customer, so
some clarification might be in order. I'd vote for *don't*
validate against an external DTD either. We've nailed down
implicit serialization (c14n); implicit parsing might be
good too.

Merlin

r/reagle@w3.org/2001.09.04/15:06:45
>We can call it optional if we can get interop on an example of this as an 
>explicit transform. Anyone want to send an example to the list?



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baltimore Technologies plc will not be liable for direct,  special,  indirect 
or consequential  damages  arising  from  alteration of  the contents of this
message by a third party or as a result of any virus being passed on.

In addition, certain Marketing collateral may be added from time to time to
promote Baltimore Technologies products, services, Global e-Security or
appearance at trade shows and conferences.

This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept by
Baltimore MIMEsweeper for Content Security threats, including
computer viruses.
   http://www.baltimore.com