forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <>
Subject Re: XInclude
Date Mon, 28 Jul 2008 12:46:44 GMT
David Crossley wrote:
> Ross Gardler wrote:
>> Gavin wrote:
>>>> From: Brian M Dube
>>>> Ross Gardler wrote:
>>>>> Brian M Dube wrote:
>>>>>> Gavin wrote:
>>>>>>> Well this seemed to pass my tests locally, its late I'll look
in the
>>>>>>> morning
>>>>>>> and either fix it or revert.
>>>>>> I committed r678217 to suppress validation on samples-b/xinclude.xml.
>>>>> -1
>>>>> Obscuring a bad commit is not good practice. We should revert the
>>>>> offending commit or fix the problem it introduced.
>>>> The problem does not appear to be trivial. The Document DTD would need
>>>> to allow for XInclude almost everywhere. Is this practical? What is the
>>>> alternative?
>>> Well, bad day for me, I 'assumed' we had xinclude support for our
>>> document-v20, so thanks for reverting.
>>> In another thread I'm talking about removing the todo list, one of the items
>>> on that list says :-
>>> 18. - [code] Migrate to a decent schema language, primarily so that we can
>>> use namespaces in XML docs, allowing things like XInclude, in-line metadata,
>>> in-line SVG, Jelly snippets, or anything else users can make a Transformer
>>> for. ?$B"* open
>>> So it seems that is not done. I don't know the best way forward on this, we
>>> can add it to our DTD, create a new one and add it to our schema, point to
>>> something better existing or .. ??
> IIRC, we have decided in the past to add it to our xdocs DTD,
> just that no-one has done it. Search the mail lists and Jira.
> There are many discussions. I am just back from holidays
> and busy catching up, so cannot help more. Here is one
> starting point, but there are more:
> As long as we can do the same thing whenever we move
> to XHTML as the internal format, then i am happy for us
> add any well-reasoned new elements to the XDOC DTD.
>>> The patch itself seems flawless in its application, matching the W3C
>>> examples [1] pretty closely, so I don?$B!Gt have a problem with the way they
>>> have been applied as such, just need to work out the best approach to
>>> approve the method and get it validated against our tests.
>> Hmmm.... I'm sure I've used XInclude without breaking validation,
>> however, it is many years ago now and my memory may be tricking me.
>> I'm afraid I'm not too familiar with DTD's.
>> I'd be happy to remove my -1 on the example and the validation turn off
>> if there was a nice big *warning* at the top of the sample page to warn
>> users about this and to point to an issue to fix it.
> I am not happy to supply an example that contradicts standards.

OK. I'll keep my -1 one then, I was borderline.

We need to add it to the DTD.


View raw message