[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: DTDs still widely used ? was RE: Namespaces A Mess?
Hi, I don't post often, but could not resist. I have developed an interest in RELAX NG, and it has quickly become my favourite schema language, because I like the compact syntax and the expressive power. I am currently working on a schema for technical documents and articles, where I use the compact RELAX NG syntax for writing the source documents. I then use Trang to convert to the RELAX NG XML syntax, DTD, and XSD. I also use mkrls to convert the DTD I get from Trang to an XMetaL rules file. All the conversions are controlled by a very simple Ruby script. This system allows me to write schemas using a decent syntax, use the schema, after conversion to a DTD, in a good editor, and maintain compatibility with all three schema formats. Of course, as long as I am gunning for compatibility, the format I am designing is also subject to the limitations of all the formats... AFAIK, I would ditch DTDs for RELAX NG if the tool support was good enough, and widespread enough. XSD will never become a favourite, it's much to clunky. DTDs are still a necessity when working with document oriented XML, whether I like it or not. /Henrik Mårtensson On Wed, 2005-10-19 at 22:49, Rick Marshall wrote: > before anyone "throws the baby out with the bathwater", can i point out > that i use dtd's (internally - you can't see them) because i only care > that the element/attribute structure is correct in incoming messages. > the rest is handled by the downstream processors. > > in this circumstance i'm not sure i want the added complexity of xsd. > > rick > > DuCharme, Bob (LNG-CHO) wrote: > > <snip>
|
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
|