- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 15:27:19 +0000
- To: www-validator-cvs@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4476 ------- Comment #3 from chris@w3.org 2007-04-20 15:27 ------- Thanks for the summary change, Olivier. It covers most of my point and is clearer. The remaining thing is that the validator says that a document is not valid. Rather, it should say that it does not know if its valid. Reviewing the possible sources of machine-readable validity information: a) A DTD may be supplied, and may or may not be intended to completely describe a document (it may for example just declare some entities in the internal DTD subset) b) A W3C XML Schema may be supplied (but providing a link to one with xsi:schemaLocation is optional) c) A RelaxNG schema, with or without Schematron annotation may be there. General practice is not to explicitly link to it from the instance. Thus, when presented with a document, the validator should exercise caution when declaring that something is invalid. Sometimes it is invalid, sometimes its valid ,and sometimes the validator does not have enough information to tell (or does not support the schema language used). I would like the validator to explicitly use this third case where appropriate, rather than giving a false negative.
Received on Friday, 20 April 2007 15:27:26 UTC