Re: [xml-dev] RE: The Best Technologies Don't Win

>  A non-normative RELAX NG schema is under  
> construction, though.)

assuming your parser presents an xml view of the html, I assume?

> There's no need for such a DTD. HTML5 doesn't pretend to be an  
> application of SGML and has no normative DTD.

True but if you _were_ looking to add some tag implication functionality
(which seemed to be the suggestion at the point mathml entered this
thread) looking at what was or was not possible using sgml would
probably be a useful guideline, even if the html5 spec, and certainly
any browser based html5 implementation wouldn't actually use an sgml
parser. 

> Hixie suggested that. With my parser writer hat on, I am  
> uncomfortable with new implied tags.

I don't mind tags being non-optional but then I don't mind xhtml, so I'm
not sure that I can really judge whether it makes sense for an
html5+"math-which-may-or-may-not-be-mathml"+svg+whatever document to use
html conventions in the html bits and XML  elsewhere, or whether it
would be more natural to make extensive use of implied markup througout.
I'm sure that arguments could be made either way (but this probably
isn't the right list)

David