Re: SVG schema: Relax NG or not?

On Thursday, May 8, 2003, 12:46:32 AM, Tobias wrote:


TR> The SVG WG (its chair actually) said it would like to choose Relax NG as 
TR> schema format for the master schema:
TR> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2003Apr/0096.html ,
TR> but sees issues.

TR> Now XHTML went with RNG as main (and currently exclusive) format:

TR> [...]
TR> C. XHTML RELAX NG Module Implementations
TR> http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-xhtml2-20030506/relax_module_defs.html#a_relaxng_module_defs

Yes and just read it - its so simple and clear. There are various ways
of writing RNG, one is the heavily nested, one big blob way, another
is the 'dtd like' small definitions way; which i prefer and which this
modularization uses.


Comparing this RNG modularization to the DTD modularization though,
its also apparent how much cruft is simply not needed because the
namespace support in RNG is simple and elegant whereas the namespace
hacks that one uses in DTDs are a succession of flaming hoops to jump
though.

TR> Perhaps Relax NG is a candidate format for the main SVG schema?

Yes; because then we can form XHTML2+SVG profiles with ease.


-- 
 Chris                            mailto:chris@w3.org

Received on Wednesday, 7 May 2003 19:34:21 UTC