[whatwg] Re: DOCTYPE shouldn't be optional
ian at hixie.ch
Fri Jul 9 06:51:44 PDT 2004
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004, Malcolm Rowe wrote:
> I really don't know enough about the issue that the TAG are discussing
> to comment, though I think it essentially boils down to how you can
> determine if a document is 'valid' if it contains elements from multiple
> namespaces. There's no generic way to validate a compound document, for
I'm not convinced of the need for validity checking (beyond syntax
checking) for reasons I mentioned the other day, but if one assumes that
one wants validity checking of compound documents, it's not hard: you just
need a schema language that supports describing constraints in terms of
mixed namespaces. For example, "<ul> can only contain <li>" or "<div> can
contain anything" or "<svg:rect> is only allowed inside <svg:svg>" or
"<svg:svg> is allowed anywhere". Then you take all the constraints and see
if all the elements in the document obey all of them.
Not that anyone has actually written such a language, as far as I know.
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg