Re: DOCBOOK-APPS: XInclude doesn't validate with xmllint

[Yann Dirson <ydirson@fr.alcove.com>]

On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 06:41:08AM -0400, Daniel Veillard wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 12:28:29PM +0200, Yann Dirson wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 05:52:05AM -0400, Daniel Veillard wrote:
> > >   The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that
> > > in general, validation should occur after XInclude processing.
> > 
> > IIRC that would not meet the definition of "validity" for an XML
> > document, or am I wrong ?
> 
>   If you can find a definition for an XML document, then maybe ;-)
> I think it fits the definition for the stream of bytes coming out of
> the XInclude process.

Sure, but I think it also fits the definition for each document taken
as input for this process, and I'm not sure we want invalid XML
documents as a primary source of the toolchain.


>   The XML processing model is probably not something we should explore
> too much in the DocBook list, there are other hot channels for this, but
> I think it would be reasonable to document the expected processing
> steps (possibly multiple path like FO vs. PassiveTex), if we didn't already.

There may be some needs for this, but as you say "I would not
constraint the use case while there have been only little use so far".
Let's just list typical uses as of current State of the Art.

-- 
Yann Dirson <Yann.Dirson@fr.alcove.com>                 http://www.alcove.com/
Technical support manager                Responsable de l'assistance technique
Senior Free-Software Consultant          Consultant senior en Logiciels Libres
Debian developer (dirson@debian.org)                        Développeur Debian