[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
I concur.
Let me clarify that I have never been a DTD-hater. I wish more XML Software
did a better job of supporting or making full use of DTDs.
But the problem I mentioned, how they inhibit embedding one doc in another,
is pretty damning.
I guess the SGML way to work around this would be to parse the DTD (and
document prolog), and merge it into the parent documents DTD. But SGML also
had SUBDOCs, too.
-Wayne Steele
>From: Marcus Carr <mrc@allette.com.au>
>To: Michael Brennan <Michael_Brennan@Allegis.com>
>CC: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
>Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Documents within documents
>Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 13:21:21 +1100
>
>
>Michael Brennan wrote:
>
> > And I still want to kill off DTDs. I've just come around to the
> > understanding that we have to be sure we are adequately addressing all
>of
> > the use cases they serve before we do so -- and XML Schema is clearly
>not a
> > DTD killer, but perhaps RELAX NG is.
>
>I think I'm of the same mind as you. I'm not so attached to DTDs that
>they'll be
>pryin' 'em out of my cold, dead hands, but I do need to see them replaced
>properly. In our haste for advancement, it's worth considering that a lot
>of
>meaningful XML work has been done using DTDs and a lot of projects still
>use
>them, for better or for worse. My preference is for them to eventually be
>abandoned in favour of a clearly superior approach - it's too dangerous and
>disruptive to give them the flick and then figure out how to replace them.
>
>
>--
>Regards,
>
>Marcus Carr email: mrc@allette.com.au
>___________________________________________________________________
>Allette Systems (Australia) www: http://www.allette.com.au
>___________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com
|
