Namespaces and XML validation

[james anderson]

the assertion below re validation appears here time and again. this forum has,
however, yet to bear witness to such a demonstration.

Peter Murray-Rust wrote:
> 
> At 12:27 10/08/98 -0700, Murray Altheim wrote:
> [...]
> >
> >Peter,
> >
> 
> >over the working group archives to see that compatibility is not a given.
> 
> These are not generally available...

would someone be so kind as to edit the appropriate contributions to the
working group archive to make them available for public consumption.

> 
> >In all but trivial DTDs namespaces have been shown to be incompatible with
> >XML 1.0 validation (or at very least more manual effort than would be
> >worth the trouble*). The solution for validating moderately complex
> >structures using qualified names without wholescale rewriting of existing
> >DTDs has not yet been found. It is a given that any such alternative

please give examples of the cases which cannot be validated. 

> >validation solution would be inherently incompatible with existing the
> >validation methodology (ie., the SGML-compatible declaration syntax in
> >XML 1.0).

this may be true (wrt. the methodology, not the syntax), but, in the long run,
that does not matter.

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