[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: DTD confusion (was Re: Lotsa laughs)

• From: David Megginson <david@m...>
• To: "XML Developers' List" <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Mon, 7 Jun 1999 10:14:30 -0400 (EDT)

Chris Lilley writes:

 > > If you give me a single, well-formed XML document, I can *always*
 > > write a DTD that describes its structure.
 > 
 > Yes. You declare each observed element, give it a content model of any,
 > declare each observed attribute, and make it PCDATA.

In fact, you can do it without resorting to ANY; you could also type
the attributes much more closely as well.  There is already existing
software that will take a stab at it for you.

The original point, though, was that by definition a document is not
well-formed if it cannot be described by a DTD, not that the absence
of a DTD (or other schema) is insignificant.


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...)

• References:
  • Re: DTD confusion (was Re: Lotsa laughs)
    • From: Chris Lilley <chris@w...>

• Prev by Date: Byte on XML-RPC
• Next by Date: re: Well-Formed SNAFU
• Previous by thread: Re: DTD confusion (was Re: Lotsa laughs)
• Next by thread: schema output for critique
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread