[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
That's contracting. Initiate with your proposal, get the
counterproposal. Someone sends me an RFP and states the
rules for the response. I use their format. If they
are being *invasive*, using the language to force acceptance
of terms by the format, I write exceptions. It's noisy.
The problem with DTDs is not that they are sender oriented,
but that they have to be designed to enable negotiable contents
or to negotiate out noise.
Validity goes both ways.
len
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Kay [mailto:michael.h.kay@ntlworld.com]
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 2:50 AM
To: 'Bill Lindsey'; 'Michael Brennan'
Cc: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Doctypes again (was Re: [xml-dev] Documents
within documents)
> For me, the most compelling use for (the notion
> of) document type is as a contract. A document
> type declaration asserts that a document's
> syntax follows some set of rules to express the
> document creator's intended semantics.
Yes. I've always thought one of the weakest things about DTDs is that a
document is considered valid if it meets the sender's criteria, whether or
not it meets the recipient's.
|
