• From: Aaron Skonnard <aarons@d...>
• To: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>, Xml-Dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 20:05:04 -0600

> From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@s...]
>
> At 09:32 AM 8/3/00 +0800, Rick JELLIFFE wrote:
> >This agrees with XML's premise that it is a resolved document format,
> >rather than a format for documents in progress.
>
> Is that premise formally stated anywhere?
>
> That seems to be the core of the 'bad idea' I've been fighting all these
> years...
>
> Otherwise, I was reasonably in agreement - DTDs aren't anywhere near dead,
> for better or worse.
>

As soon as XSD is done and the supporting infrastructure is in place, I
think they are closer to dead than you think at least in the world I live
in. XML currently caters to widely different groups, which adds fuel to the
debate.

-aaron

• References:
  • Re: Arbitrary Infoset boundaries (was Re: Common XML - FinalReviewDraft)
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Arbitrary Infoset boundaries (was Re: Common XML -FinalReviewDraft)
• Next by Date: Re: Arbitrary Infoset boundaries (was Re: Common XML -FinalReviewDraft)
• Previous by thread: Re: Arbitrary Infoset boundaries (was Re: Common XML - FinalReviewDraft)
• Next by thread: Re: Arbitrary Infoset boundaries (was Re: Common XML -FinalReviewDraft)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread