• To: Ronald Bourret <rpbourret@r...>
• Subject: Re: Compound Documents? RE: Announcement of theNVDL FCD
• From: Bob Foster <bob@o...>
• Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 07:47:33 -0800
• Cc: 'XML Developers List' <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <41FB1A83.7080704@r...>
• References: <200501272137.j0RLbQW21036@s...> <41F972D9.5000507@o...> <41FB1A83.7080704@r...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041217

Ronald Bourret wrote:
> Which is a shame. Having, for example, to rewrite the XHTML schema just 
> so I can include SVG fragments makes building compound documents almost 
> impossibly difficult. I suspect we need to think about more types of 
> validity than those currently offered by DTDs, XML Schemas, Schematron, 
> and RELAX NG.

It would be, but I was wrong. Read Rick Jelliffe's reply.

Bob Foster

• References:
  • Compound Documents? RE: Announcement of the NVDL FCD
    • From: "Roger L. Costello" <costello@m...>
  • Re: Compound Documents? RE: Announcement of theNVDL FCD
    • From: Bob Foster <bob@o...>
  • Re: Compound Documents? RE: Announcement of theNVDL FCD
    • From: Ronald Bourret <rpbourret@r...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Even if you're not ... was If you're going to the W3C meeting in March
• Next by Date: Re: Even if you're not ... was If you're going to the W3Cmeeting in March
• Previous by thread: Re: Compound Documents? RE: Announcement of theNVDL FCD
• Next by thread: Re: Compound Documents? RE: Announcement of the NVDL FCD
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread