Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Tim Bray wrote: > > >6. Internal Subsets > > Shouldn't that just be 6. DTDs? No because if DTDs were really controversial, we wouldn't be having such a hard time adopting the children fields of VRML97 to DTDs (why, we just put Children elements in the DTDs!!) and XHTML would have been designed around a schema instead of a DTD. Come to think of it, schemas have DTDs too. So far, no one seems to blink. BTW: as one of the inventors of XML, and great thinkers in markup theories, is it possible the VRML represents something that XML can't or shouldn't? Asked seriously because that claim was made today during the GreatChildNode controversy. This one is worth understanding, XMLers, as it calls into question whether XML actually can be thought of as a universal data format. 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/ or CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1 Please note: New list subscriptions now closed in preparation for transfer to OASIS.
|
