[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Tim Bray wrote:
> K. Ari Krupnikov wrote:
>
> > Of course we did. All I was saying was that "view source" is no
> > substitute for "read DTD".
>
>
> On the contrary. View Source is essential. Read DTD is nice-to-have.
When you are starting the project, View Source is essential to get your
head around the gist of the data. But how would you feel about an XML
parser implementor who figured out how to implement XML only by
examining instances and not by reading the productions in the spec?
Surely you wouldn't accept that as an excuse for a broken XML parser or
WSDL parser in an expensive application server or database server: "Oh,
we didn't read the grammar/DTD."
That said, projects vary in their tolerance for misunderstanding.
Paul Prescod
|
