Ross Gardler wrote: > Gavin wrote: > >> From: Brian M Dube > >> Ross Gardler wrote: > >>> Brian M Dube wrote: > >>>> Gavin wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Well this seemed to pass my tests locally, its late I'll look in the > >>>>> morning > >>>>> and either fix it or revert. > >>>> > >>>> I committed r678217 to suppress validation on samples-b/xinclude.xml. > >>> > >>> -1 > >>> > >>> Obscuring a bad commit is not good practice. We should revert the > >>> offending commit or fix the problem it introduced. > >> The problem does not appear to be trivial. The Document DTD would need > >> to allow for XInclude almost everywhere. Is this practical? What is the > >> alternative? > > > > Well, bad day for me, I 'assumed' we had xinclude support for our > > document-v20, so thanks for reverting. > > > > In another thread I'm talking about removing the todo list, one of the items > > on that list says :- > > > > 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. ?$B"* open > > > > So it seems that is not done. I don't know the best way forward on this, we > > can add it to our DTD, create a new one and add it to our schema, point to > > something better existing or .. ??
IIRC, we have decided in the past to add it to our xdocs DTD, just that no-one has done it. Search the mail lists and Jira. There are many discussions. I am just back from holidays and busy catching up, so cannot help more. Here is one starting point, but there are more: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&mode=hide&pid=12310000&sorter/order=DESC&sorter/field=priority&resolution=-1&component=12310001 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOR-1032 As long as we can do the same thing whenever we move to XHTML as the internal format, then i am happy for us add any well-reasoned new elements to the XDOC DTD. > > The patch itself seems flawless in its application, matching the W3C > > examples [1] pretty closely, so I don?$B!Gt 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. > > Hmmm.... I'm sure I've used XInclude without breaking validation, > however, it is many years ago now and my memory may be tricking me. > > I'm afraid I'm not too familiar with DTD's. > > 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 am not happy to supply an example that contradicts standards. -David
