[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
The only justification I can give for learning DTDs now that other schema technologies exist is so that you are familiar with them when they come up in conversation, books or during application development. Also as mentioned earlier, their more esoteric features are typically not used in many application development scenarios.
-----Original Message-----
From: tariq abdur-rahim [mailto:ecliptoid330@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thu 5/23/2002 9:36 AM
To: clbullar@ingr.com
Cc: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: RE: [xml-dev] DTDs, W3C Schemas, RELAX NG, Schematron?
Interesting point! However, would the argument now,
not be that, given the realative "weakness" of DTDs in
comparison to Schemas, RELAX NG, and Schematron, what
would the purpose be of even going the DTD route for
validation? Too, given the example stated...
"Say you want to design a new parts language.
You will want to validate your design. Once
done, someone using it probably doesn't want
to do that. You can start from DTDs, or you
can start higher up from XML Schema. How
much validation do you need? For example,
Schemas will do more than DTDs, but not as
much as Schemas plus Schematron. You
can do it all with Schematron, but that
could be painful."
...(a) "...Schemas will do more than DTDs, but not as
much as Schemas plus Schematron...", why bother with
DTDs at all? (b) Since, "DTDs aren't as strong as XML
Schema or RELAX NG for validation..." and "...you
might still need schematron or a means to enforce
business rules...", again i must ask why DTDs - now.
Back when it was first introduced is understandable,
but with the advent of the aforementioned
technologies, i am left with a feeling of "why?"
regarding the DTD approach.
With that in mind, is there a bottom-line sans the
"based upon situation" recourse?
Regards,
--- "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>
wrote:
> Don't overlook RELAX RNG. Despite it's status
> vis a vis the W3C, I think it has a future as
> the "easier to do and easier to explain" schema
> language with a little less than XSD and a
> bit more than DTDs.
>
> len
>
> From: tariq abdur-rahim
> [mailto:ecliptoid330@yahoo.com]
>
> Thanks a lot betty, len, and michael. The input and
> advice is very informative and most definately
> appreciated. i guess in a nutshell, DTDs still
> carry
> a certain significance and an amount of usefulness,
> but the Schema+Schematron combination is a
> 'stronger'
> approach to take in XML application development.
>
> len, i will definately check out the resources that
> you suggested.
=====
>=>=>=>=>=>=>=>=>=>=>=>=>
T. A b d u r - R a h i m
W e b D e v e l o p e r
More sacrifice,
creates better living.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience
http://launch.yahoo.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
|
