• From: Len Bullard <cbullard@h...>
• To: Frank Boumphrey <bckman@i...>
• Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2000 17:24:49 -0600

Frank Boumphrey wrote:
> 
> > Wrong.  A document type needs to conform to the specification that
> > defines it: the specification
> 
> Of course David is quite right! I should have said that a document must
> conform to a schema, and that a schema can be a DTD, or a 'schema' or a
> narative description, etc. ...
> 
> Frank

It conforms to the named record of authority for its contract.

len


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• References:
  • Namespace prefixes optional?
    • From: Bob Kline <bkline@r...>
  • Re: Namespace prefixes optional?
    • From: David Megginson <david@m...>
  • Re: Namespace prefixes optional?
    • From: james anderson <James.Anderson@m...>
  • Re: Namespace prefixes optional?
    • From: David Megginson <david@m...>
  • Re: Namespace prefixes optional?
    • From: james anderson <James.Anderson@m...>
  • Well-formed and valid
    • From: David Megginson <david@m...>
  • Re: Well-formed and valid
    • From: "Frank Boumphrey" <bckman@i...>
  • Re: Well-formed and valid
    • From: David Megginson <david@m...>
  • Re: Well-formed and valid
    • From: "Frank Boumphrey" <bckman@i...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Namespace prefixes optional?
• Next by Date: Re: Namespaces and XSLT simplified syntax
• Previous by thread: Re: Well-formed and valid
• Next by thread: Re: Namespace prefixes optional?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread