Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: Jonathan Borden <email@example.com>
- To: Michael Champion <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
- Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:55:19 -0400
Michael Champion wrote:
>So whatever the future of schemas for declaring constraints on
> document structure and content, DTDs aren't going away in the forseeable
> future as the place to make such declarations.
> And the question of how to handle the case where both the DTD and schema
> contain content model constraints is not easy to answer. I write this
> [sorry, Lauren!] while listening to the DOM WG beat their
> collective heads
> against the wall trying to figure this out ... and lets not even
> talk about
> the little nuggets of complexity that namespaces throw into this
> toxic stew.
At the very very least DTDs need to be retrofitted to handle namespaces. I
would say, add no new functionality, allow me to use DTDs as they otherwise
currently exist, with documents that use namespaces.
1) need to define namespace prefix bindings in the DTD, at least for local
2) the DTD declaration will depend on the expanded name, not the
prefix:local name in the literal sense as it currently stands.
The Open Healthcare Group