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

Re: Re: determining ID-ness in XML

• From: Tom Bradford <bradford@d...>
• To: David Brownell <david-b@p...>
• Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 14:19:42 -0700

On Monday, October 29, 2001, at 02:00 PM, David Brownell wrote:
> Won't be enough to create valid documents, true -- not that you can ever
> just have an ATTLIST decl without also declaring what you call 
> "rootType".
> I could have picked a bone with that statement too.

Should have referenced it as element1 (or element2 for that matter).  
Breezed over the example too quickly to remember the element names that 
were used.  But the point I was trying to make was that it sits really 
badly that any item should be referenced but not declared...  like the 
reference to a root element in a DOCTYPE or an owning element in an 
ATTLIST.

> Microsoft _has_ defined validation differently, and much the same
> way you have.  They've taught people, who've taught people, ...

If there is any one organization who has been 'bad' for XML (after the 
W3C, of course), it's been Microsoft, and I take offense at being 
accused of using their product, living their lifestyle, or evangelizing 
their way of being.  Nothing personally against you.

--Tom

• References:
  • Re: Re: determining ID-ness in XML
    • From: David Brownell <david-b@p...>

• 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