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

RE: W3C, responsibility (Re: Why the Infoset?)

• From: Ann Navarro <ann@w...>
• To: Linda van den Brink <lvdbrink@b...>,"'xml-dev@x...'" <xml-dev@x...>
• Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 10:07:07 -0400

At 09:36 AM 8/4/2000 +0200, Linda van den Brink wrote:
> > Some of the W3C's big lies (bad behavior) follow:
> >
> > 1. XML is backwards compatible with SGML
> >
> > DTDs are no longer supported by the W3C, in favor of XML-Schemas.
> > XML-Schemas are not backwards compatible with SGML.  So, as a practial
> > matter, the statement "XML is compatible with SGML" really isn't true,
> > although this was the W3C promise in 1998 and much of 1999.
>
>I'm curious if there's a (official?) document on their site in which they
>state this? If there is, I must have missed it. It seems strange, because
>DTDs are used in a lot of w3c specs, including XHTML and XML-Schemas itself.
>Not to mention the important role they play in the XML specification. How
>can the w3c stop supporting DTDs without going against the XML 1.0 standard?

There isn't such a document.

There has been encouragement to produce recommendations using XML Schema 
where possible (and practical), but by no means have DTDs been outlawed in 
some fashion, and in fact Schemas rely on DTDs to provide functionality 
that they can't cover.

ANn
---
Just Released! - HTML BY Example
Now shipping -  Mastering XML
Also in print:  Effective Web Design: Master the Essentials

Founder, WebGeek, Inc.                      http://www.webgeek.com
Chief Operating Officer, HTML Writers Guild http://www.hwg.org

• Prev by Date: Re: Reality Check (was: Why the Infoset?)
• Next by Date: Eating crow
• Previous by thread: RE: W3C, responsibility (Re: Why the Infoset?)
• Next by thread: Re: Arbitrary Infoset boundaries (was Re: Common XML - Final
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread