• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: DSDL part 9: new namespace declarations not needed as part of DTD syntax?
• From: Arjun Ray <aray@n...>
• Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 17:50:08 +0000
• In-reply-to: <2C61CCE8A870D211A523080009B94E430752B580@HQ5>
• References: <2C61CCE8A870D211A523080009B94E430752B580@HQ5>

"Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...> wrote:

| IMO, the non XML format is only a pain for a parser writer. 

And an XML format would be a pain for the human reader/maintainer.

| For the author, once learned, I think it easy and comfortable, 
| particularly as I've said before, because one doesn't get lost in 
| element elementness or attribute attributeness.  

Indeed.  The typical schema "document" is practically all "markup".  The
syntax was designed to unobtrusive when there's lots of #PCDATA.  When
there's hardly any text content, the relentless progressions of pointy
brackets and quoted strings does *not* make for readability. 

| No, GIs are NOT types anymore than PE names are types. 

Yea, verily, what he said.

| I'd drop parameter entities. 

Time to develop proper syntactic forms where PEs were pinch-hitting.  I'd
say the SGML Extended Facilities (Annex A of ISO 10744) would be a good
place to start mining for ideas.

 

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: DSDL part 9: new namespace declarations not needed as part of DTD syntax?
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• References:
  • RE: DSDL part 9: new namespace declarations not needed as part of DTD syntax?
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Re: [dsdl-comment] Re: Re: Re: DSDL: use
• Next by Date: Re: DSDL part 9: new namespace declarations not needed as part of DTD syntax?
• Previous by thread: RE: DSDL part 9: new namespace declarations not needed as part of DTD syntax?
• Next by thread: Re: DSDL part 9: new namespace declarations not needed as part of DTD syntax?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread