A compromise?

Fri Sep 17 18:09:32 BST 1999

Don Park wrote:
> 
> What if we came up with a way to associate a schema with any element without
> using namespace?  Would it address the real concerns of the HTML WG?

I'm also curious why the HTML WG should care, since (X)HTML has
only DTDs (currently three of them) for which there's already
a standard association technique:

    <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC
        '-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN'
        'http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/transitional.dtd'>

Seems to me that the best compromise is to stick exclusively to what
is already accepted -- ruling out schemas.

- Dave

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)