coming clean with the SGML crowd (was re: namespaces)

[Tim Bray]

At 06:32 PM 9/10/98 -0400, Richard L. Goerwitz III wrote:

>It's unbelievable, but people are already talking about legacy XML and
>about the abandonment of SGML.  Is it any wonder that vendors like Micro-
>soft seem to be sitting on the fence?  We have some people who declare
>firmly that DTDs are the only accepted schema/validation mechanism.  And
>we have other louder, stronger voices who are already declaring them dead.

I'd like to disagree with the perception that people are not in favor of
validation.  Early users of XML, it seems, typically want *more* validation
than SGML offers, rather than less.  That's why there's so much energy going 
into the early stages of the new-schema design.  Yes, we need DTDs, but also, 
we need more, and we need it PDQ.  -Tim

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)