- From: Peter Murray-Rust <Peter@ursus.demon.co.uk>
- Date: Wed, 26 Mar 1997 22:20:14 GMT
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
- Cc: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
In message <libSDtMail.9703261102.27801.altheim@mehitabel/jurassic> altheim writes: [...] > > I really do think it's time we began discussing *conformance levels* so > that people can build lightweight apps, intermediate apps, and the big > monster processing apps that do TEI-like linking, DSSSL-o stylesheets, etc. > I agree completely. The variety of discussion and approaches on xml-dev suggests that we cannot have one-suits-all tools. The mythical CS grad student has now spent a mythical month discussing parsing. Of the two parsers, one has < hardwired and the other tells me that 'lt' is undefined :-) I can work happily with either, but not easily with both. And I'd prefer not to have to edit all my old files to add ENTITY at the start. The simple minded approach that I would take is for a parser to have command-line switches that activate different levels of conformance. e.g. -e 'pretend that <!Entity amp '&'> (etc.) are included in the declaration subset' -isolat1 'pretend that <!Entity isolat1 PUBLIC ... > is included' There has been discussion about RFCs firming up existing practice. If we do not mandate practice in some areas, then we should have a mechanism for encouraging it (perhaps with a view to firming it up later). There are probably standard methods for this, but how about 'Generally Accepted Conventions' as something that is published alongside XML material but without the specific accreditation of the WG/ERB. For example, if the draft says nothing about < etc., then at least there should be something stating that almost everyone thinks it's a good idea to use them in a standard manner. Other areas for GAC could be tag sets (I see this as a growing problem for XML where people want to mix and match from (say) the Math DTD, HTML3.2, etc.). It's probably not soluble, but we want to avoid some of the worst excesses that have happened with HTML. We must remember that if/when XML is in widespread use, most of the authors will never have heard of SGML. Yet another area is URL specifications and the choice of XML-link names. If the lead is set with good examples, then a lot of people will work from those. P. > -- Peter Murray-Rust, domestic net connection Virtual School of Molecular Sciences http://www.vsms.nottingham.ac.uk/
Received on Wednesday, 26 March 1997 16:49:52 UTC