Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: mark hu <email@example.com>
- To: "Box, Don" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, 'yimin zhu' <email@example.com>,firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 08:59:38 -0400
Yes, Don - I fully agree with you, Shema is definitely better than DTDs when
dealing with meta-data driven process, e.g. you have a complex bussiness
model and the logics are fixed - but the data type are changed pretty often
and you'll hate DTDs when streaming the whole process out, and the other
hand schema is more flexible to apply the changes, and are we going to say
BYB to DTDs soon in the very near future ?? - when is the next release of
SOAP spec. ? - cheers.
"Breath, Open Up Eyes and Think"
----- Original Message -----
From: Box, Don <email@example.com>
To: 'yimin zhu' <firstname.lastname@example.org>; <email@example.com>
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2000 8:00 PM
Subject: RE: Are there still a lot of people using DTD rather than schema?
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: yimin zhu [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> > Sent: Monday, July 31, 2000 3:46 PM
> > To: 'email@example.com'
> > Subject: Are there still a lot of people using DTD rather than schema?
> > I recently attended an XML training course and the instructor
> > was teaching
> > DTD rather than schema, so I asked him if there were still a
> > lot of people
> > using DTD rather than schema.
> Please tell me it wasn't a DevelopMentor course. We try to downplay DTDs
> much as possible.
> For a rant in favor of DTDs, check out Murray Altheim's
> For a rant against DTDs, check out chapter 4 of Addison Wesley's
> XML beyond markup" (Yes, I'm an author but I think you can grab that
> from free somewhere (XML.COM)?).
> In summary, the type model of schemas is much closer to that of the
> you are already writing than DTDs are. For metadata-driven software,
> are likely to be much easier to deal with than DTDs, despite a few edge