W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org > June 1997


From: David G. Durand <dgd@cs.bu.edu>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 14:39:29 -0500
Message-Id: <v03007807afcde91947d1@[]>
To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
At 8:38 PM -0500 5/23/97, Andrew Layman wrote:
>Oh.  I agree that we don't want to preclude validation.  Just that
>validation and namespaces are separate issues.
>--Andrew Layman
>   AndrewL@microsoft.com

As part of my review of namespace blather I came upon this anti-gem.

Since validation is not possible in the presence of arbitrary included
markup unless that markup is part of a DTD, the GI-hacking namespace
proposals are all intimately related to the question of validation. Wishing
will not make the problem go away, so we need to address it if we adopt any
such proposal. If architectural forms meet the need, of course, these are
all non-questions, or at best, possible improvements for some future xml
2.0 or 1.1 or whatever.

  -- David

David Durand              dgd@cs.bu.edu  \  david@dynamicDiagrams.com
Boston University Computer Science        \  Sr. Analyst
http://www.cs.bu.edu/students/grads/dgd/   \  Dynamic Diagrams
--------------------------------------------\  http://dynamicDiagrams.com/
MAPA: mapping for the WWW                    \__________________________
Received on Wednesday, 18 June 1997 14:37:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:27 UTC