Namespaces and XML validation

Tim Bray tbray at
Fri Aug 7 19:20:24 BST 1998

At 01:07 PM 8/7/98 -0400, John Cowan wrote:
>Okay.  So you can validate provided you are willing not only to
>rewrite the DTD (which is reasonable) but to rewrite the instance

The re-writing is pretty mechanical... having said that, I agree that
the real lesson is that the requirement for a new schema facility which
is a DTD superset and also namespace-sensitive is becoming glaringly

>That concedes in effect that there are instances which
>simply *cannot* be validated, because they use the same QNames
>in inconsistent ways.

That doesn't follow; you can certainly construct a DTD to describe
any conceivable well-formed instance.  If what you're saying is
that a single namespace contains usages of the same element or attribute
that are so wildly inconsistent that a DTD won't be helpful, then
that is a problem of that namespace which would exist even were it
standing alone - thus is orthogonal to the issue of namespaces. -Tim

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

More information about the Xml-dev mailing list