Re: [xml-dev] Come On, DTD, Come On! Thoughts on DSDL Part 9

[Marcus Carr <mcarr@allette.com.au>]

Arjun Ray wrote:

> PEs need to die.  Killing them off, however, needs additions to DTD syntax
> to cover the situations for which to date PEs have been used as kludges.

The only reason I'd have for keeping them is to allow a DTD to be broken into
separate files. As long as that was catered for somehow, I'd be happy to see them
die.

I could do without the ability to group element and attribute declarations too -
like PEs, I think they make DTDs more difficult to read, particularly if you're
looking for a particular element declaration. I'd rather search for the string
"<!ELEMENT foo" than sift through all the places that foo gets mentioned in the
DTD.

Terseness in DTD redesign is of minimal importance...;-)


--
Regards,

Marcus Carr                      email:  mcarr@allette.com.au
___________________________________________________________________
Allette Systems (Australia)      www:    http://www.allette.com.au
___________________________________________________________________
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
       - Einstein