Re: is this switch valid?


once again I'm struggling with this...

how do I demonstrate that a given code sample is "valid to the SVG  
Tiny 1.2 relaxNG schema"
not to myself, but to a non-technical audience, who would just like  
to see the magic "congratulations this code validates..." preferably  
on a w3c validator.


Jonathan Chetwynd
Accessibility Consultant on Media Literacy and the Internet

On 12 Dec 2007, at 18:53, Chris Lilley wrote:

On Wednesday, December 12, 2007, 12:31:07 PM, ~:'' wrote:

~?> Chris,

~?> thanks so much for the quick response.
~?> I have tried to understand what you wrote,
~?> (schema superceding DTD was of interest... ~:")
~?> but remain concerned,

~?> the w3c validator cannot validate mixed namespaces.
~?> is there any advice about when this might be resolved?

Thats another limitation of DTDs - non namespace aware. They can sort  
of be faked, but not really dealt with. Thats another reason people  
move to other schema languages.

~?> If foreignObject with html will not validate, this makes it less  
~?> useful:
~?> for instance does not validate

It makes the DTD validation less useful, yes. The content is still  

~?> similarly I cannot find a way to link to external RDF that  
~?> ie not a comment.

~?> My concern is that, whilst I have a little understanding, the larger
~?> audience of people who are not aware of SVG, expect code to  
~?> and most especially code written by an accessibility consultant.

Validating is fine in general. Validating *to a DTD* is a dead end,  
however. As you said, it doesn't work as soonas you extend into  
multiple namespaces.

~?> it's not sufficient to suggest "don't use foreignObject or RDF"

Agreed (and I didn't).

~?> Jonathan Chetwynd
~?> Accessibility Consultant on Media Literacy and the Internet

  Chris Lilley          
  Interaction Domain Leader
  Co-Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
  W3C Graphics Activity Lead
  Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG

Received on Wednesday, 12 December 2007 21:22:19 UTC