Lists Home |
Date Index |
At 03:36 PM 11/1/2002 -0800, Tim Bray wrote:
>First, in background I would say that HTML is not an XML Schema *based*
>language, the semantics of HTML are described in written prose and
>implemented in compiled code, the schema provides error checking and
>redundant expression of some of the constraints.
I think that's splitting hairs -- you know as well as I do that moving
forward the HTML WG has been tasked with defining XHTML using Schemas.
You wouldn't reasonably ask that your schema also functioned as your
stylesheet, or your compression engine, or any number of other things; it's
just far from obvious that funny-character-naming is a thing that a schema
No, I wouldn't. However, with the exception of the stylesheet mentioned, I
wouldn't expect a consumer of my language to have to define and develop
those items either. That's what we're asking for when you say 'just create
a DTD for the entities'.
(When reading my arguments, please keep in mind that I'm not arguing solely
in regards to the development of XHTML. We will always have a DTD and/or
schema. However, not all documents will, and therein, in my opinion, lies