Re: [rfc-i] Where was the discussion?
Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Wed, 22 January 2020 13:10 UTC
Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E71AAF40710 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 05:10:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gmx.net
Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tADGJgrPkJ7K for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 05:10:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1A39F406F7 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 05:10:07 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1579698611; bh=/P88J+0diOv5wWEwiayHX8I4dm03JtTewOGhnmUO1+c=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=cWG3pDq9VmmrFDZsJjHgnnEGyn9CoV8WTsdAaeQqU6ZuAv+yxlXprJyzSlqEN84Y+ CxDlTk621iEUTKrj/enwIug3DKnDSVN5Sorv5yQ63jUbB9iX4LKH4QpM7d5XAmejsW x3m/HcTTKi+Bj/SInIRx4NRUHpSY9IQLG6ZGdjIY=
X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c
Received: from [192.168.1.81] ([217.91.35.233]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx105 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1Mw9UK-1jmDrz3Edo-00s4JI; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 14:10:11 +0100
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
Cc: RFC Interest <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
References: <CAMm+LwiXhhJO7qYi41+DC4W7uMUVipXqyq75Fq2vagA1ppJNdA@mail.gmail.com> <10cca93f-a8b8-4c42-0653-3b12fa67ad12@gmail.com> <CAMm+LwgA-1UffBfrH-Y3J6pfh7ni9kNrndp=gHNyUyi5j=oLxg@mail.gmail.com> <53607da4-6608-783b-b875-65551e3add19@gmail.com> <CAMm+LwgNU2Dr3bB+A8k+UwbQiRRzgUkoRRh60tc6+bBv6CXwfQ@mail.gmail.com> <70ed6362-41ee-faf5-8f90-d094455dbdf4@gmail.com> <CAMm+Lwhy-AV_K5evzGdpDi-ynpLE4RxXCVB1HercickYfZaubg@mail.gmail.com> <e8bc039a-b85f-61e8-966d-912ec1cfd861@gmail.com> <1d18f689-781a-2306-3c98-ae8536a01bdd@gmx.de> <CAMm+LwjzqHTpBOTSfKMDYXrJZ1oHfWJuZBt0dG6uVSHHoRsn3w@mail.gmail.com> <38557d27-5e29-6162-ac50-019ac4f581c3@gmail.com> <34373E24-2573-4188-80E4-A2CC3630C5F1@mnot.net> <5512c6ef-1f31-034a-3600-f4e34e2046bf@gmx.de> <CAMm+Lwi39g3EM-W6v+zTWw1X13Y-Tc9VjFfv0zA-sqjd2jyr6w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <e051b29f-cd95-c332-597d-17591f27fdd7@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 14:10:10 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAMm+Lwi39g3EM-W6v+zTWw1X13Y-Tc9VjFfv0zA-sqjd2jyr6w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:uFq+8u5pOwvlFV+JNnWX3LmwC4zDtkq/He8jyGiMiGqVsMv7X5y TPpicfL7W0PF1LSt8jBTZi9PlSVftPwnPjbs/39aoOGhHrGtOHeHOYedK7hLPsXBzldeJ/Y oG+a9y97nbAxBcGp8KfBICppwWkGUHWHw3zz3T14SeOxLeBB6ypJYg+uD6pR5OYmXXQWIEP hNUtcX2h6bduiINMIf8ug==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:cTeGueus89Y=:qbLITz4nEkBDhjhijKEi0K vGfKEOlAJlMyP/5cFVBzWiCTjqwcy8N8YX4dxyDE+k/b2xmokiH/OOaBCvp1rVHJq6fHOh9Pa jaNzELcsE/SIBdGN1jLJQRwrpBSNHL8RUEl7TE/rCukbpUj6z6NPRFQuF8/wlQykk5C7X5mQa yn2XsrvCnc+jevMKNgYT1pJ/SfWtcr90CSNWW+3dv7BWJylBCypbHRD6svLUMfIerL4KU5JA6 wIt399fQLfiusqUmwO5zE0AFccUCQE6IkaAz6Mt+3x1Y9nwQFTGBJcq0oitEb4UIFFbRQzv1L SmtPHg/lewmJEHW3Lb6aQmmUl2IZts4hE+NPs3+Ox7eyB2KrIiqCjefdsQgMqwTaEOPpRTI+i bMHDEBcu2EUTVb8ZPor9Qy/6wvNLafJf0VfgsRIeKa5bkwYOkJZzkXIBJ551BqnI81yEVaRsb cVak5WhCjikr7yMyRXv8jdR6RN/QFjR+K/Y72yXnNukpD/0wBTUNwKoY75mHr3JZBDcf1EANG 9zWpsKkHNVjZvy6dtrQ+tEHOGq6b+fpaWhGzqp/JhyiZ5iIkYEAPUUT5GIlZhQ7bR4/PRwv0W 5anXsF6amWuAramJCGx0ZYAD7wgifkvUMn5RbTrjyo0F8+TNT61V3JR8X/II5x2eUTlQb5k1t LqqRp6DSQG7Su/UTXPzPjLTUB20CP2jCaf42xoV57TDSVK/km4m3bebkJSQxw72/ncuK0Yaaa 24SHeBPlBTOUCPWEqnHXhRl7B8okBE0C8pptK/DAuAihzy9patPs4uCdYS6wSS1Phns/IpD0i rwqUyQ8z42ywUMCDoFvBr/1Ee/6oHAnL/ZCBL7i4u0Alcs0hZz5pru4j+knLDNWjKQ3XIC5Oz r/zaKnWaMuqKEmsiMxpAJEA/oWsQDjLPLN+hWLeN7ISVuu3vq9asVxtm3iIhMqOFVNM2XYicf vuKhHP3k8EfIvLWpC1LMIg4LeBUZ0uaCy8tI6wruggj5CS4wBYyohvoCFnO8h5T92uDFfUOL0 Y5cn1ngRHu8kOVZ4bP4GWp/ybn2pYtajlCRAT8JMmLX8GmmUcITwYaU3HxjTwTyf5gJAg56M5 xkRi+Z9+jnmCrztN1HGJvsNRPaiBJ2aGju0OwzaGOebg4pOEMz9FbtLPR/szw4Kmw3C17LI/W 9WPhzbPHYiUs3OWdtA+egOA4fFdh59CFImtUionGqNEgwZbze3WRXMg4mxFetI0JhkEmCmOqb BC7tNQrN1yGyR9+qv
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Where was the discussion?
X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." <rfc-interest.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 13:10:11 -0000
On 22.01.2020 13:37, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 12:45 AM Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de > <mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de>> wrote: > > On 22.01.2020 03:14, Mark Nottingham wrote: > > On 22 Jan 2020, at 12:53 pm, Brian E Carpenter > <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com <mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>> > wrote: > >> > >> possible proposals to extend it? > > > > It's probably good to be clear about what we mean about "extend" > in the context of an XML format defined by Relax NG. > > > > Any new attribute or element is going to fail validation using > the schema in RFC7991 - there's not really anything to be done about > that. So, a new schema will need to be written and published; > effectively there is no backwards-compatible extension of that > format, we need to "fork" it, not extend it. > > We need to *revise* it. > > I argued to allow extension elements attributes using extension > namespaces, but couldn't get support for that. > > > Fortunately, the SVG spec is separate and defined by W3C in any case. > The schema bears little resemblance to the constraints imposed by the > tools, the informal description is not consistent with the formal and > there are much better ways to constrain an XML schema than writing a > RelaxNG schema that is sort-of but not-quite the same. Well, the SVG RFC profile indeed has its own grammer, defined in RFC 7996, so not by the W3C. Best regards, Julian
- [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG profile … Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Doug Royer
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Doug Royer
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Leonard Rosenthol
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Leonard Rosenthol
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Doug Royer
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Julian Reschke
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Michael Richardson
- Re: [rfc-i] Where was the discussion? Doug Royer
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Doug Royer
- Re: [rfc-i] Where was the discussion? Julian Reschke
- Re: [rfc-i] Where was the discussion? Carsten Bormann
- Re: [rfc-i] Where was the discussion? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [rfc-i] Where was the discussion? Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [rfc-i] Where was the discussion? Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [rfc-i] Where was the discussion? Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [rfc-i] Where was the discussion? Mark Nottingham
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [rfc-i] Where was the discussion? Julian Reschke
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Christian Huitema
- Re: [rfc-i] Where was the discussion? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [rfc-i] Where was the discussion? Julian Reschke
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Salz, Rich
- Re: [rfc-i] Where was the discussion? Michael Richardson
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Michael Richardson
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… S Moonesamy
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Donald Eastlake
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [rfc-i] No, constraining to a custom SVG prof… Brian E Carpenter