Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: James Robertson <email@example.com>
- To: "XML Developers' List" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 16:23:35 +1000
At 23:53 19/03/1999 , David Megginson wrote:
| Almost correct. One expensive disadvantage of SGML (until WebSGML) is
| that it requires full DTD conformance at every stage of production; as
| a result, if your production chain consists of ten physical steps,
| writing out SGML at each stage, you *must* have DTDs for all of the
| intermediate steps. This one constraint can add $100K or more to a
| large enterprise SGML project, since DTD writers are expensive to hire
| (and a single, configured DTD becomes heavily obfuscated so that it
| can almost never be maintained in-house).
I'd like to take this point up.
Having done a transformation with 12 steps in the chain,
I would disagree that the DTD becomes a big problem.
If you're using a tool like Omnimark, you can choose
to view the document as SGML or text. In general, a
lot of the steps use the latter, with some simple
So in practice, we just ended up with about 5 DTDs
that were very close to each other.
Not a lot of work.
And it did ensure that all was correct at
each stage, catching errors in a most satisfying
Step Two Designs Pty Ltd
SGML, XML & HTML Consultancy
"Beyond the Idea"
ACN 081 019 623
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:email@example.com
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org)