Re: SVG schema: Relax NG or not?

Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org> wrote:

> MI> But frankly I don't expect everyone who wants to mix their own
> MI> vocabulary with XHTML2 would move to RELAX NG, that's why the HTML
> MI> WG plans to provide XHTML2 schemas in RELAX NG, XML Schema and DTD
> MI> so that people can choose one that suits their needs.  Or better still,
> MI> I personally hope that the Document Schema Definition Languages (DSDL)
> MI> could eventually give us possibility to validate different "islands"
> MI> with different kind of schema languages, e.g. RELAX NG for XHTML2 part
> MI> and XML Schema for SVG part.
> 
> Or, more likely, RNG for the XHTML2 and SVG parts and XML Schema for
> the mathML part (etc).

That's fine as well.  The HTML WG won't force other WGs to pick one,
the SVG WG should choose an appropriate schema language (or languages)
which suits SVG's needs.  If the SVG WG wants to develop RELAX NG
schema for SVG, I'm happy to help.  I've demonstrated possible
approach to the SVG WG a while ago, and it's up to the SVG WG which
approach you would choose.

BTW, as for using some sort of schema snippets in the spec, what
the HTML WG adopted is to use so-called "abstract definition",
which is schema language independent.  An abstract module may be
implemented in any schema language, DTD or XML Schema or RELAX NG
or whatever.

    cf. http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/abstraction.html

That's the same for XHTML2, the normative module definition is
the abstract definition, and RELAX NG schema is a module
implementation.  If the SVG WG would like to provide more than
one schemas, you could consider a similar approach.

Regards,
-- 
Masayasu Ishikawa / mimasa@w3.org
W3C - World Wide Web Consortium

Received on Friday, 9 May 2003 05:43:24 UTC