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

Re: Resource Directory Description Language (RDDL)

• From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@m...>
• To: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@c...>,"Sean B. Palmer" <sean@m...>
• Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2001 21:16:59 -0500

Henry S. Thompson wrote:

>
> If I understand this correctly, it is _much_ more complex than
> necessary: see the XML Schema DTD [1] for a lighter-weight approach to a
> DTD which allows any (or no) prefix without using marked sections.
>
> ht
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema.dtd


    Since MODXHTML remains only a Proposed Recommendation perhaps there's
time yet!  is apparent that MODXHTML's complexity derives largely from
problems interfacing qnames, either defaulted or prefixed, with DTDs.
Presumably an XHTML XSD won't have these issues, and <plead>perhaps if a
draft XHTML XSD were available we could add it to RDDL's own directory
</plead> ... the one I created was exported from XML Authority which just
can't handle the namespaceing mechanisms nor prefixed elements... sigh.

-Jonathan

• Follow-Ups:
  • Approach to XHTML M12N in XML Schemas (was Re: Resource DirectoryDescription Language (RDDL))
    • From: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@a...>

• References:
  • Re: Resource Directory Description Language (RDDL)
    • From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@m...>
  • Re: Resource Directory Description Language (RDDL)
    • From: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@m...>
  • Re: Resource Directory Description Language (RDDL)
    • From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)

• Prev by Date: Re: Resource Directory Description Language (RDDL)
• Next by Date: Re: Resource Gloss (Human Readable)
• Previous by thread: Re: Resource Directory Description Language (RDDL)
• Next by thread: Approach to XHTML M12N in XML Schemas (was Re: Resource DirectoryDescription Language (RDDL))
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread