Mailing-List: contact dev-help@forrest.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@forrest.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of cjxaf-forrest-dev-1@m.gmane.org
 designates 80.91.229.2 as permitted sender)
To: dev@forrest.apache.org
From: Nicola Ken Barozzi <nicolaken@apache.org>
Subject: Re: Planning the move to XHTML2 (Re: (FOR-184) Switch to XHTML2))
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 11:42:15 +0200
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <deul9o$tpo$1@sea.gmane.org>
References: <629133446.1123923834497.JavaMail.jira@ajax.apache.org>
 <42FDCBEE.2040104@apache.org> <deh8ja$n10$1@sea.gmane.org>
 <20050827072050.GA21250@igg.indexgeo.com.au> <deuckh$627$1@sea.gmane.org>
 <20050829073756.GA25773@igg.indexgeo.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716)
In-Reply-To: <20050829073756.GA25773@igg.indexgeo.com.au>
Sender: news <news@sea.gmane.org>

David Crossley wrote:
> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> 
>>David Crossley wrote:
>>
>>>I revised the list, taking the replies into account
>>>and adding some new queries.
>>>
>>>>- agree the subset of XHTML2 to be used
>>>>and document that via example.
>>>
>>>See other thread.
>>>
>>>>- create DTD's
>>>
>>>Why do we need DTDs for use with internal structure?
>>
>>For using XHTML2 as an input format.
> 
> For that part i did understand the need. If the xml instances
> declare them, then the parser needs to resolve them locally.
> Same with any document type.
> 
> Of course there are no DTDs yet at Appendix F or G.
> 
> However, we are discussing internal processing,
> and i was wondering what is the need for DTDs there.
> Is there any need?

No.

> Or am i misunderstanding something about XHTML2 and DTDs?

Not AFAIU.

>>In fact it will be a modularization
>>of XHTML2 via RelaxNG validation.
              ^^^^^^^^^^^

>>>>- Decide how to make the pipeline process.
>>>>Now we have body-*.html and stuff, but a simpler process
>>>>should be devised.
...
> Do you mean keep the existing pipelines and
> starting this new one so that old and new can
> work side-by-side until the new stuff is ready.

Correct.

No need for a separate branch means easier involvment.

-- 
Nicola Ken Barozzi                   nicolaken@apache.org
            - verba volant, scripta manent -
   (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------