RE: Using existing staff.xml based tests with HTML processors

> From: Mary Brady [mailto:mbrady@nist.gov] 

> Would this approach require that all processors would have to support
> XHTML Modularization?

XHTML m12n is not something that a processor supports explicitly; as with any XML vocabulary, it depends on your needs.

A browser for example can display an extended XHTML document by treating known XHTML elements as usual while determining the display of the rest based on style (CSS) or some default handling rules (i.e. display the text contained in them). Validation is not mandatory.

Something more critical can validate such a document using a DTD or Schema that contains the XHTML modules along with the custom modules.

With m12n, you can use one file to perform HTML dependent tests (for example using HTML specific collections such as document.forms) or raw XML tests to non XHTML elements included in such a file while the file is valid (either as XML or XHTML). 

Kindest regards,

Manos


> 
> --Mary
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Manos Batsis" <m.batsis@bsnet.gr>
> To: <bv@opera.no>; "Arnold, Curt" <Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com>
> Cc: <www-dom-ts@w3.org>
> Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 6:48 AM
> Subject: RE: Using existing staff.xml based tests with HTML processors
> 
> 
> >
> >
> > XHTML test files must be valid to be XHTML in the first 
> place; technically
> speaking though, there is a way to have valid XHTML just by adding a
> 'wrapper'[1] to the existing files while using XHTML 
> Modularization (either
> in XML Schema [1] or DTD [2]). I would be very interested to help if
> something like that is chosen, especially if XML Schema is involved.
> >
> > [1] like
> >
> > <!DOCTYPE  bla>
> > <html xmlns="myDomain/bla">
> >    <head>
> >       <title>
> >          Untitled
> >       </title>
> >    </head>
> >    <body>
> >
> > <!-- existing XML content -->
> >
> >    </body>
> > </html>
> >
> > [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-xhtml-m12n-schema-20011219/
> > [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/
> >
> > Kindest regards,
> >
> > Manos
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Bjørn Vermo [mailto:bv@opera.no]
> > > Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 1:40 PM
> > > To: 'www-dom-ts@w3.org'; Arnold, Curt
> > > Subject: Re: Using existing staff.xml based tests with 
> HTML processors
> > >
> > >
> > > 2002-03-06 18:36:21, "Arnold, Curt" 
> <Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >I was thinking that you could produce an close [X]HTML
> > > analogue of staff.xml
> > > >by doing a direct translation of each element in staff to a
> > > distinct [X]HTML
> > > >element with a similar content model.
> > > >
> > > >Most of the elements simply contain PCDATA and have no
> > > attributes, so you
> > > >could make <employeeId> to <code> and <salary> to <pre>, etc
> > > and could
> > > >change <address domestic="">something</address> to <a
> > > href="">something</a>,
> > > ><employee> could go to <p>.  The only structural change 
> that would be
> > > >changing <staff> to <html><body>.
> > >
> > > I believe it would be more useful to use constructs like <div
> > > class="employeeid"> and <a class="domestic" href=2xx">
> > >
> > > --
> > > Bjørn Vermo
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> 
>

Received on Friday, 8 March 2002 07:50:11 UTC