[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Ok. Here's the full text of my comment and the response I received:
=============
Subject: schemaLocation attribute has no place in XHTML specification
I strongly object to the provision in section 3.1.1 that: "The start tag
must also contain an xsi:schemaLocation attribute. The schema location
for XHTML 2.0 is defined to be http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/SCHEMA/xhtml2.xsd.";
This is absurd. XML Schema is incapable of expressing any but the most
trivial constraints in this specification and thus is useless for any
practical validation of XHTML.
But it would be just as wrong to require a reference to a RELAX NG (or a
RELAX NG + Schematron, which would be more useful) schema. The XHTML
committee should not be deciding for XHTML users how their XHTML
documents are validated, much less specifying a specific schema for the job.
Bob Foster
Bocaloco Software LLC
http://xmlbuddy.com/
=============
On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 05:28:05 +0200, <bob@objfac.com> wrote:
> I strongly object to the provision in section 3.1.1 that: "The start tag
> must also contain an xsi:schemaLocation attribute. The schema location
> for XHTML 2.0 is defined to be
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/SCHEMA/xhtml2.xsd.";
This turns out to be a typo. We had agreed that the root element MAY
contain an xsi:schemalocation.
> This is absurd. XML Schema is incapable of expressing any but the most
> trivial constraints in this specification and thus is useless for any
> practical validation of XHTML.
We disagree that it is absurd. XML Schema can express much that is
useful, and is a W3C technology, so seems a likely candidate for inclusion.
> But it would be just as wrong to require a reference to a RELAX NG (or a
> RELAX NG + Schematron, which would be more useful) schema.
It would be wrong to *require* it, but not to *allow* a reference to
other schemas. In fact it would be rather useful, but we are not aware
of a standard mechanism yet to allow references to schemas. Perhaps we
should define
<link rel="schema" type="application/rng+xml" href="xhtml2.rng"/>
> The XHTML committee should not be deciding for XHTML users how their
XHTML
> documents are validated, much less specifying a specific schema for
the job.
No, we should be providing mechanisms to allow them to do it if they wish.
Best wishes,
Steven Pemberton
For the HTML WG
|
