Re-Issue: Experience Report [1]: Modularization of XHTML

I formally withdraw my previous remarks about XML Schemas in m12n (PR#364),
and issue these in replacement.

The real issue is: "further work into XHTML Schemas should be completed and
published, so as the HTML WG *and* the general public can provide input, as
well as providing a different line of interpretation for XHTML".
Let me explain: an XML Schema version of XHTML will be very different from
the current version: in the way that it is defined by its scheme [sic].

At the moment we are approaching an XML Schema m12n implementation as a
"corruption of (X)HTML and the WWW". This is fair, because compared to DTDs,
XML Schemas don't do the job as far as XHTML is concerned: XML Schemas are
for a completely different purpose.
However, what if we approach it from the "Semantic Web" point of view? You
could imply that we are humanising the Semantic Web, rather than automating
the WWW, i.e. let's have a version of XHTML for the Semantic Web.

I think an XML Schema version of XHTML should be built that way round: with
XML/RDF/Schemas in mind. Why not? I feel it is quite a good idea, but the
W3C think of it the first way round! It would *not* be a replacement, or
even an alternative to DTD m12n: it would be a *completely* different
system. In other words, think of it as a different avenue of opportunity for
W3C technologies.

Further to this: let the public help, and provide input on it. The Semantic
Web and m12n are going to be used by us, so we should have *some* input on
their creation.

Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
----------------------------------------------------
WAP Tech Info - http://www.waptechinfo.com/
Mysterylights.com - http://www.mysterylights.com/
XHTML Modularization Resource - http://xhtml.waptechinfo.com/modularization/
----------------------------------------------------
"The Internet; is that thing still around?" - Homer J. Simpson

Received on Thursday, 2 November 2000 06:06:10 UTC