[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- To: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
- Subject: DTDs still widely used ? was RE: Namespaces A Mess?
- From: bryan rasmussen <rasmussen.bryan@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 12:23:07 +0200
- Cc: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=auK+USs7UxeekSjON2t5gvS3hQs3D1tcJroEGs1BsjAdW0b41wWTT2Jn8vqJ6rk3mRW7zvhZjsOJtk4PWJI+hEn3FbuWK+HTS484P7dRu0lDhTjMRDw41/F9JhOojS9ytHVXN1AeKlJX784bmRHM8lKZ79SEoQBxqDGOhozDXwM=
A very unscientific quick check on the usage of DTDs
query 1 on google: filetype:xml "<?xml"
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&q=filetype%3Axml+%22%3C%3Fxml
about 27,700,000
query 2 on google: filetype:xml doctype
http://www.google.com/search?q=filetype%3Axml+%22DOCTYPE%22&btnG=Search&hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1
about 9,100
results no doubt effected by widespread use of RSS and other blogging
formats that do not use DTDs.
Doing a quick check against xml.coverpages.org via google I had the
feeling that (W3C) schemas and dtds were running neck and neck for
validation mechanisms, and that these each accounted for a third of
documents. Using xml.coverpages search I got a return of 2613 with the
term DTD used, while "xml schema" OR XSD returned 1590, a discrepency
no doubt partially caused by SGML applications being referenced in the
search.
Of course my work probably colors my perception of DTDs as no longer
important, given that I see so many XML Schema validated formats.
Cheers
Bryan Rasmussen
On 10/16/05, Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> wrote:
> > Other than that though I don't see how anyone could ever argue that
> > prefixes are information bearing.
> >
> > Has anyone made this argument?
>
> Yes: see http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xml-c14n-20010315#NoNSPrefixRewriting
> >
> >
> > >
> > > (f) DTDs are an intrinsic part of XML, but DTDs are not
> > namespace-aware.
> > Are DTDs really an intrinsic part of XML? This seems so 1999.
> >
> > Let's assume that DTDs and namespaces are at odds, it seems that
> > namespaces are the clear winners in their battle. I hardly ever see
> > DTDs to do validation anymore, only to shove some entities in.
> >
> I think that DTDs are still very widely used.
>
> Michael Kay
> http://www.saxonica.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://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>
>
>
>
|
