XML and (K)Office

Tim Bray tbray at textuality.com
Fri Mar 26 17:48:53 GMT 1999

At 09:20 AM 3/26/99 +1000, James Robertson wrote:
>Without the rigour of a DTD, we've got nothing.

This sentiment is not universally shared.  While DTDs are extremely
useful and should be constructed as (a small) part of any serious
language-design effort, they are in some cases unnecessary (for 
validation, full-text indexing, and lots of other things) and in
other cases insufficient - DTD validation never comes close
to real business-logic validation.  I am near-schizophrenic these days,
running around telling people that yes, they should use DTDs, and
simultaneously warning them that there are situations where they
fail to be either necessary or sufficient; the kind of mystico-
religious attitude above does not help.

>How will future users make sense of the format without
>a DTD?

And what, pray tell, part of a DTD helps you "make sense" of a
format? -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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
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