nALFS2 Daemon and Front Split

Matthew Burgess matthew at
Thu Aug 12 10:30:48 PDT 2004

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 10:24:22 -0700
"Kevin P. Fleming" <kpfleming at> wrote:

> Matthew Burgess wrote:
> > Well, I was surprised at how quickly Relax-NG validation was
> > compared to DTD validation.  When validating the LFS book against
> > the docbook-rng schema I didn't think it had done anything as it was
> > that quick. Removing an end tag to produce obviously invalid XML
> > soon proved me wrong!  In short, I don't think users will notice at
> > all if the client was to validate a profile before doing anything
> > with it.
> That's good to hear... that was my biggest concern with automatic 
> validation, although there is another as well. I don't believe there's
> any standard means for the profile to reference the schema it should
> be validated against (unlike a DTD), so nALFS2 would somehow have to
> know what schema to use. In addition, being able to load multiple
> profiles means they could potentially be written using different
> syntax versions, and thus require different schemas.

You're assessment of the situation seems to be in line with mine
regarding documents referencing schemas.  That seemed like a fairly big
omission to me when I first stumbled across it, but I'm sure there are
valid reasons to do things the way they are currently.  There are
proposals floating about for referencing a relax-ng schema from a source
document, I'll have to dig around for a bit to find them though.  I'll
put my findings on the Wiki if that's OK?



More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list