[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
> Two types of partial validation that would be useful for constructing
> compound documents are:
>
> 1) Validate the language you know and ignore fragments headed by unknown
> elements.
>
> 2) Start at the top and only start validating when you hit an element
> you know. (The opposite of #1.)
>
> I suspect that, with a bit of thought, people can find other use cases
> and types of validation to fit them that are not met by current
> definitions.
I think that there is a middle ground-- or more importantly, that item
(2) can be used in conjunction with item (1). Instead of considering
single languages within a single validation why not consider multiples?
Then as the validator proceeds it will switch between the languages it
knows (most likely based on namespace). This way it can switch
validation modes internally as it encounters languages.
Currently the only way that this is possible is by having a bunch of
<any> elements in XML Schema. I wonder if there will be a grammar that
allows you to define a compound document on top of a (name your
favorite) schema. So you could override a <p> (or flow.mix) and say that
it allows <any> element from MathML.
Cheers,
Jeff Rafter
|
