[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: To validate or not to validate, that is the question

• From: Dan Brickley <Daniel.Brickley@b...>
• To: XML Dev <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 16:02:06 +0100 (BST)

On Mon, 17 Aug 1998, John Cowan wrote:

> Martin Bryan wrote:
> 
> > Why does this group seem to feel there is an overpowering need to develop a
> > DTD that can be used to validate the compound structure, rather than its
> > individual fragments?
> 
> I think your model of "compound document" is too simple.  You seem
> to model it as a set of self-contained fragments enclosed in a
> container.
> 
> I expect to see much more complex documents:  a Chemical ML description
> of a molecule, with (a) embedded HTML English-language documentation,
> which itself contains several inclusions of MathML, and (b) a SMIL
> document that marshals a non-XML movie of the molecule.  How would
> you validate just the HTML part, given that the HTML DTD does not
> understand MathML?

Nice real-life example. The paper 'Web Architecture: Extensible
Languages',  by Tim Berners-Lee & Dan Connolly, URL:

	http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-webarch-extlang

... has a number more and discusses broader motivations for tackling
this. In particular http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-webarch-extlang#Mixing
should be of interest.

Dan





--
Daniel.Brickley@b...                           
Institute for Learning and Research Technology   http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/
University of Bristol,  Bristol BS8 1TN, UK.     tel: +44(0)117 9288478



xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• References:
  • Re: To validate or not to validate, that is the question
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@l...>

• Prev by Date: Re: More on Namespaces (also long, but also optimistic)
• Next by Date: Re: More on Namespaces (also long, but also optimistic)
• Previous by thread: Re: To validate or not to validate, that is the question
• Next by thread: Re: To validate or not to validate, that is the question
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread