Re: Validation of new document based on cnxml

Le 7 mai 2005 à 03:07, David Malcolm a écrit :

> On Fri, 2005-05-06 at 23:54 +0200, Michèle Garoche wrote:
>
>> Le 6 mai 2005 à 22:42, Geert Stappers a écrit :
>>
>>
>>> On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 09:41:07PM +0200, Michèle Garoche wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Le 6 mai 2005 à 01:40, David Malcolm a écrit :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 2004-08-04 at 16:56 +0200, Michèle Garoche wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>   <snip/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> (Coming back months later)
>>>>> Did any of this make it into CVS (or bugzilla)?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> No you rejected the patch as you wanted that someone from the cnxml
>>>> team confirmed it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> What was the response the cnxml team?
>>>
>> None.
>>
>
> I'm afraid I've lost track of exactly what was proposed in this  
> thread.
I made two propositions:
1 -  One for the example folder: cnxml.xml
   a - First to change the url which was wrong, this one was integrated.
   b - A second one to give a newer example, because the current one  
is based on a very old version, it was never integrated.

The example validates, but does not display correctly.

2 -  Another one for the dispspec: cnxml.xds.in
To change the url, this was integrated.
To provide a spec conformed to the standard, this one was not  
integrated.

Generating a cnxml document does not work properly. It creates a non  
validating document, because the dispspec is not conforming the  
standard.

>> From looking at "dispspecs/cnxml.xds.in" in CVS, it looks like  
>> Michèle's
>>
> proposed fixes ought now to be working.  Are they?
No, they are not, because the code should also be changed so that the  
disspec could be honored, i.e. id allowed on all elements.

Cheers,
Michèle
<http://micmacfr.homeunix.org>