FW: Namespaces and DTDs
James.Anderson at mecomnet.de
Fri Mar 12 09:51:35 GMT 1999
Didier PH Martin wrote:
> I am using these simple rule of thumb:
> a) a XML DTD is useful for XML editors not for XML renderers
if one presumes this, then one loses the ability to use attribute defaults
and, thereby, for example, the chance to use "architectural" techniques.
> b) Most XML renderers (XSL, CSS or DSSSL won't do document validation)
> c) a XML interpreter do not need a DTD (something else than rendition)
> If I need a DTD at the receiving end, then I am now no longer in the XML
> world but in the SGML world because the receiving end needs a validating
these techniques do note presume validation, just the availability of
> Several SGML parser like for instance SP can parse XML simplifyed
> DTD. The only simplification I gained is the -- or -0 think called omitags.
> Therefore, because I have to include a DTD for validation, better use then a
> SGML format.
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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)
More information about the Xml-dev