• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• To: yimin zhu <yiminz@t...>,"'xml-dev@l...'" <xml-dev@l...>
• Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 08:07:51 -0500

Your instructor is right.  

1.  The DTD is part of the XML 1.0 standard.  Schemas aren't.
2.  The DTD has been in use in SGML since the mid eighties 
and in GML before that.
3.  There is a lot of markup dependant on DTD processing.

That said, the extensibility of schemas is superior at the 
cost of verbosity and complexity.  If you can handle those, 
and once the schema becomes a final recommendation, it is the 
way to go.

Two years ago I would have bitten my arm off before admitting 
that.  Coyote ugly is coyote ugly.


Len Bullard
Intergraph Public Safety
clbullar@i...
http://fly.hiwaay.net/~cbullard/lensongs.ram

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


-----Original Message-----
From: yimin zhu [mailto:yiminz@t...]
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2000 4:46 PM
To: 'xml-dev@l...'
Subject: Are there still a lot of people using DTD rather than schema?


I recently attended an XML training course and the instructor was teaching
DTD rather than schema, so I asked him if there were still a lot of people
using DTD rather than schema. I got a "yes", but I was not convinced. Does
anyone have any idea? 

• Prev by Date: Re: Are there still a lot of people using DTD rather than schema?
• Next by Date: Re: XML in Office 200X
• Previous by thread: Re: Are there still a lot of people using DTD rather than schema?
• Next by thread: RE: Are there still a lot of people using DTD rather than schema?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread