Re: Why a DTD and not a XML-Schema ?

Le 18/12/03 =E0 23:50, Low Zhen Lin a =E9crit:
Low> =20
Low> =20

Low> I know of the advantages. However - the fact is that there is a lot=20
Low> more to validate than just types. I'd rather leave typed validation =
to=20
Low> the specialised validating tool, and well-formedness to the generic=20
Low> validator.=20
Yeah but how will you validate typed data you are not using a Schema ?

DTDs have limitations see :=20

http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/xml-schema/#sidebar1

and=20

http://lucas.ucs.ed.ac.uk/xml-schema/

Low> Feel free to write an XML schema on it... I have a feeling that XML=20
Low> schemas are less supported by the generic validators. If you can wri=
te=20
Low> a XML schema that can functionally replace all the DTDs - and fit in=
to=20
Low> a <!DOCTYPE> declaration, we might take that instead.=20

What do you mean with "fit into <!DOCTYPE>"

Low> Truth is, I didn't even need to write a DTD. DTDs are just the most=20
Low> convenient way for me to give a specification.=20

Low>=20
Low> There are also areas DTD can do that XML schema can't. I just can't=20
Low> remember them... I think they had to do with attributes.=20


Well. COuld please tell a bit more because I can not give arguments again=
st your=20
point if do not tell me which areas you are talking about
:=3D)


best regards
--=20
R.Pac