[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Doctypes again (was Re: Documents within documen
That's contracting. Initiate with your proposal, get the counterproposal. Someone sends me an RFP and states the rules for the response. I use their format. If they are being *invasive*, using the language to force acceptance of terms by the format, I write exceptions. It's noisy. The problem with DTDs is not that they are sender oriented, but that they have to be designed to enable negotiable contents or to negotiate out noise. Validity goes both ways. len -----Original Message----- From: Michael Kay [mailto:michael.h.kay@n...] Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 2:50 AM To: 'Bill Lindsey'; 'Michael Brennan' Cc: xml-dev@l... Subject: RE: Doctypes again (was Re: Documents within documents) > For me, the most compelling use for (the notion > of) document type is as a contract. A document > type declaration asserts that a document's > syntax follows some set of rules to express the > document creator's intended semantics. Yes. I've always thought one of the weakest things about DTDs is that a document is considered valid if it meets the sender's criteria, whether or not it meets the recipient's.
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|