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

Re: Come On, DTD, Come On! Thoughts on DSDL Part 9

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Come On, DTD, Come On! Thoughts on DSDL Part 9
• From: Marcus Carr <mcarr@a...>
• Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 18:47:04 +1000
• Organization: Allette Systems (Australia) Pty Ltd
• References: <21C03WSJIZW64EDKJURR6596RO4WRO.3d09987e@main>

Eric Bohlman wrote:

> OTOH, that kind of grouping makes it easier (and less error-prone) to
> implement a change affecting all of a set of elements; you only need to
> change the content model or attribute list in one place, without the risk
> of missing one.

That assumes that you do want to make the change to the whole set - I've sometimes found that when I've
started modifying the content model of a set of elements that I don't actually want to make the change
to all of the elements in the set, so I'll pop some elements out and make them a new set of them. By
the end of the process, I might have a couple of smaller sets and who knows what else. I don't find
that sets necessarily lead to tidiness or maintainability.

Also, I tend to organise element declarations alphabetically in DTDs of any size and complexity, so
that probably biases me away from groups too. I agree that groups could be helpful to some, but
personally I haven't used them for a long time and don't miss them.


--
Regards,

Marcus Carr                      email:  mcarr@a...
___________________________________________________________________
Allette Systems (Australia)      www:    http://www.allette.com.au
___________________________________________________________________
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
       - Einstein

• References:
  • Re: Come On, DTD, Come On! Thoughts on DSDL Part 9
    • From: Eric Bohlman <ebohlman@e...>

• Prev by Date: DSDL part 9: new namespace declarations not needed as part of DTD syntax?
• Next by Date: Re: DSDL: use cases: namespace declaration notation
• Previous by thread: Re: Come On, DTD, Come On! Thoughts on DSDL Part 9
• Next by thread: Re: Come On, DTD, Come On! Thoughts on DSDL Part 9
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread