Mailing-List: contact dev-help@forrest.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@forrest.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <4885ABF5.9040502@apache.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:44:21 +0100
From: Ross Gardler <rgardler@apache.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Windows/20080421)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@forrest.apache.org
Subject: Re: XInclude
References: <200807191404.m6JE4FdB024545@forrest.zones.apache.org>
 <00f901c8e9ad$e660b290$0200a8c0@developer> <48824C70.4090405@apache.org>
 <48825814.8060202@apache.org> <48825A5A.7060106@apache.org>
 <011201c8ea32$c9c674f0$0200a8c0@developer> <48837A11.7050407@apache.org>
 <09700B613C4DD84FA9F2FEA52188281903EC4D7B@ayalga.fundacionctic.org>
In-Reply-To: 
 <09700B613C4DD84FA9F2FEA52188281903EC4D7B@ayalga.fundacionctic.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Carlos Tejo Alonso wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>>> 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. → 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 .. ??
>>>
>>> The patch itself seems flawless in its application, matching the W3C
>>> examples [1] pretty closely, so I don’t 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.
> 
> Are you planning to change the xdoc intermediate language? Maybe change to xhtml 1.1? I will be waiting for news in order to do my bit.

For a very long time we have intending to move to a subset of XHTML 2. 
But planning and doing are two different things. We need someone with a 
suitably strong need to solve the problems posed by XDoc to actually do it.

Why XHTML2? For a full answer see the mail archives but in short it is 
because it is modular and therefore allows us to strip out all the bits 
that we don't want. That is all the bits that make it useless as an 
intermediate language.

>> 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 don't know why it not validate. I am using the developer version of forrest in order to user xinclude, and it is working fine in my computer.

If you are running in dynamic mode (i.e. forrest run) the documents are 
not validated. There is no point in doing so as someone could edit a 
document after startup and invalidate it. When you do "forrest site" the 
docs are validated. You can also run validation with "forrest validate"

Ross