- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 19:49:47 +0300
- To: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
- Cc: www-validator@w3.org
On Aug 29, 2005, at 06:03, Terje Bless wrote: > Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> wrote: […] > > Let me make an attempt to summarize; My main points are * Doctype and schemaLocation are design bugs, because the document that is being assessed sets its own rules instead of the document being assessed being subject to rules set by the person assessing the technical quality of the document. * RELAX NG (Schematron too) fixes the bug: the RELAX NG validation process takes two independent inputs: the document and the schema. * It appears that the SVG WG is adopting RELAX NG. * If validator.w3.org adds RELAX NG support in response to what the SVG WG is doing, it would be nice if the two-input nature of the process was preserved and not regressed to the DTD ways by using heuristic schema association. > you want the validator to support… > > • …additional tests, without needing to modify the source document. Checking for conformance constraints that are "additional" in the sense that they cannot be expressed in a DTD would be useful, yes. (This is what Petr Nalevka's schemas do.) > • …additional tests based on a schema language like RNG or > Schematron. For example. > • …specifically RELAX NG and Schematron for implementing such tests. They seem to be the state of the art. RELAX NG is already used by some W3C WGs and Schematron can express constraints that are hard or impossible to express in DTD or RELAX NG but that exist in the prose of W3C specs. > • …applying such tests from arbitrary third parties. Once the machinery for validating against particular schemas is in place, why not allow the user to enter any schema by URL? -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Monday, 29 August 2005 16:49:56 UTC