DTD confusion (was Re: Lotsa laughs)
John Cowan writes: > Lisa Rein scripsit: > > > I thought that an XML v. 1.0-compliant application needed to be > > definable using a DTD (at this point) -- even if you didn't necessarily > > write one up for it -- that it *should* be possible to do so for any XML > > v 1.0-compliant application syntax. (like SMIL etc.) Is this NOT > > correct? > > That is not correct. As long as the XML documents are well-formed, > it is perfectly fine for there to be no DTD that describes them > both. Instead, you can use any of the schema proposals, or English > prose, or French alexandrines, or what you will.... In fact, Lisa and John are both right, but they're slightly at cross-purposes: 1. Any XML *document* that cannot be described by a DTD is not well-formed (I challenge anyone on the list to give me an example to the contrary). 2. An XML *document type* may contain restraints or allow structures that would be difficult or even impossible to model in a DTD. The XML document type describes the characteristics that group certain XML documents into a class -- these characteristics cannot always be described using a DTD, and, in fact, may make the writing of a general DTD for the whole class impossible. All the best, David -- David Megginson david@m... http://www.megginson.com/ xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... 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@i... the following message; (un)subscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format