• From: Rob Lugt <roblugt@e...>
• To: "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@S...>, xml-dev@l...
• Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 12:55:35 +0000

Mike Champion wrote:
>
> c) It leverages the preferred "namespace" prefix mechanism rather than the
> semi-deprecated (e.g., in SOAP) DTD internal subset or PI mechanisms. Lots
> of people have voted with their feet against these mechanisms that the
> alternatives to xml:id depend on.

Mike, I agree that putting ATTLIST declarations in the internal subset is
not an ideal solution but not for the reasons you state.  I guess it's fine
for technologies such as SOAP to create a sub-set or profile of XML that
they accept, but this can't be taken as a general statement about what is
good or bad in XML.  DTDs and the internal subset won't be deprecated until
the xml recommendation says they are - which I hope will be never (I quite
like 'em! ~ they serve a very useful purpose in document authoring).

Regards
~Rob

• References:
  • RE: Re: determining ID-ness in XML
    • From: "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@S...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Re: determining ID-ness in XML
• Next by Date: Re: Re: determining ID-ness in XML
• Previous by thread: RE: Re: determining ID-ness in XML
• Next by thread: RE: Re: determining ID-ness in XML
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread