Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: yimin zhu <email@example.com>,"'firstname.lastname@example.org'" <email@example.com>
- Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 08:07:51 -0500
Your instructor is right.
1. The DTD is part of the XML 1.0 standard. Schemas aren't.
2. The DTD has been in use in SGML since the mid eighties
and in GML before that.
3. There is a lot of markup dependant on DTD processing.
That said, the extensibility of schemas is superior at the
cost of verbosity and complexity. If you can handle those,
and once the schema becomes a final recommendation, it is the
way to go.
Two years ago I would have bitten my arm off before admitting
that. Coyote ugly is coyote ugly.
Intergraph Public Safety
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
From: yimin zhu [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2000 4:46 PM
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. I got a "yes", but I was not convinced. Does
anyone have any idea?