XML-Data: advantages over DTD syntax?

Henry S. Thompson ht at cogsci.ed.ac.uk
Fri Oct 3 11:41:38 BST 1997

Rick writes:
>  I call as exhibit #1 FrameMaker's EDD (element description definition???)
>  format.   The developers of XML-data should look hard at it, and the
>  lessons to be drawn from it.  It seems to have been conceived as a
>  better SGML than SGML  (Frame also had an additional requirement to 
>  embed structure into their interchange format too). 

I have no experience with it, but I'll make an effort soon to have a
look, thanks.

>  For exhibit #2, I call the Pinnacles or DOCBOOK DTDs, expressed
>  in XML-data.  Can someone whip it up, and we can get a much better
>  feel for how readable it is as a declaration syntax for a nice
>  juicy DTD?  The number of derived element types will probably be
>  much fewer than the number of base element types, surely. Without
>  exhibit #2, I really don't feel comfortable making claims that
>  XML-data is verbose (or reading claims that is is more transparent!)

Absolutely right.  I hope by SGML 97 in Washington to have done
exactly this (although I'm likely to use the TEI DTD).


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)

More information about the Xml-dev mailing list