Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: "Rick Jelliffe" <email@example.com>
- To: "Mark Birbeck" <Mark.Birbeck@iedigital.net>,"'XML Dev'" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 23:29:57 +1000
From: Mark Birbeck <Mark.Birbeck@iedigital.net>
>Rick Jelliffe wrote:
>> A schema is "processing" not "data": it is tied to whatever
>> understand the schema format. Editing, creating and
>> validating against a
>> schema are all applications.
> As far as I can see, one point of the schema proposal is to
>be functionally equivalent to a DTD with a few obvious advantages, one
>of these being that if we get the definition right, each node can
>specify its own schema.
What you gain on the swing you lose on the roundabout. I have been using
Adobe's EDD system for several years for defining document structures:
it allows syntax directed editing of the schema, tree views, rich text
comments, nicely formatted direct export to HTML and PDF, linking to
styles, pre- text and post-text and hard coding of flow objects (if you
want). I like it, but I still prefer DTDs.
The XML Schema Structure draft was disappointing to me: DTD syntax is
given a great leap forward (i.e., superficial but nice) from 70's
syntax (macros) to 80's syntax (objects) and a couple of things from
HyTime get twisted and added like a balloon poodle.
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)