[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Determining what schema language you should use depends upon your
application and what you want to do. If you need datatyping then it is
difficult to do this with DTDs (although there are tricks). If you are
building an application where you can pick the component then you should
select the schema language that appeals to you.
On the other hand if you have to interface with other applications, then
you may have to select a schema language(s) that support that software
tool. For example if you have end users that will be using Epic Editor,
then you have to use DTDs or XMetaL you need DTD or W3C schema.
'What Schema Language Should I Use' is a loaded question with an 'it
depends' answer.
I personally believe that DTDs still have a future. 4 years ago they
started chiselling the gravestone for DTD's and yet 4 years later new DTDs
are still being developed and there is still controversy surrounding the
various schema languages. Most commercial tools still support DTDs.
Betty
On Thu, 23 May 2002, tariq abdur-rahim wrote:
> Hi all:
>
> Thanks for the replies.
>
> Now, to continue. So, is it safe to say that beyond
> the realm of "basic validation" DTDs are weak in terms
> of usefulness? Or is it still a *must-have* in all
> and any XML development; irrespective of whether or
> not it is employed in the development of XML
> applications, XML systems, or applications that uses
> XML applications?
>
> > DTDs are an integral part of XML 1.0. They make up
> the essential dance
> > steps of basic validation.
>
> Additionally, if...
>
> > XML Schema will, like it or not, be used by just
> about everyone doing
> > industrial-strength validation.
>
> Where does the DTD stand in this respect?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
|
