[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: And the DTD says, "I'm NOT dead yet!!"
- From: "Sean B. Palmer" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <email@example.com>
- Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 15:50:48 +0000
> Dan worked his buns off to make sure HTML
> was valid SGML. No question of that. If he
> regrets that, he is angst-ridden without cause.
I doubt he regrets it, only that people didn't listen... I saw a letter of
his from 1993ish where he complains about spending a lot of time making
sure that HTML is SGML, and that no-one was taking note so he may as well
give up, but on their own heads be it. I'll try to find the URI if people
> So let's be clear: the problem was not in
> DTDs; it was in the application design. For what
> they are designed to do, DTDs work
I agree with this.
> The article doesn't disturb me. It was sent
> to me from a different list discussing schemas
> as "food for thought".
May I enquire as to what list? It seems odd to me that someone should use
this article as any form of discussion point except for that quote of Mr.
Connolly's...but I'd like to know within what context it was used...
> That makes it easy to explain why the DTD
> is there even if not why it is non-normative.
> That still makes no sense to me.
I'm quite sure what you're implying there...DTDs are non normative? Huh?
Forgive my ignorance, but I thought that the DTD format was laid out in the
SGML ISO specification...probably not.
Sean B. Palmer
"Perhaps, but let's not get bogged down in semantics."
- Homer J. Simpson, BABF07.