Roots of the DTD

[Toby Speight]

Peter> Peter Murray-Rust <URL:mailto:peter at ursus.demon.co.uk>

=> In article <3.0.1.16.19980604224340.1cef3e16 at pop3.demon.co.uk>,
=> Peter wrote:

Peter> At 17:27 04/06/98 -0400, John Cowan wrote:

>> Hmmm.  This sounds like the "root" (my syntax) or "RootElement"
>> (Ron's syntax) attribute in XSchema is a Bad Thing.  Perhaps it
>> should be removed?

Peter> Yup :-). I have not commented on the current proposals because
Peter> I wanted them to anneal before public comment. *For describing
Peter> a DTD*, here should be no requirement to define a <root> of any
Peter> sort, only <element>, <attribute>, <contentSpec> and possibly
Peter> <entity> and <notation> according to how people think.

I can forsee applications where one might say, "Please send me documents
conforming to the FOO schema," in much the same way as one requests
LaTeX or Word formats these days.  In which case, one usually needs also
to specify the root element (this is implied in LaTeX or Word).  I don't
see any harm in the schema having a default root (on the understanding
that documents may, if they wish, use a different root).

It's not a big issue to me, though.

-- 


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)