• To: tpassin@c... (Thomas B. Passin)
• Subject: Re: Come On, DTD, Come On! Thoughts on DSDL Part 9
• From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 09:11:39 -0400 (EDT)
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <005c01c212da$c59c4ac0$f6193044@tbp> from "Thomas B. Passin" at Jun 13, 2002 09:03:54 AM

Thomas B. Passin scripsit:

> Hmm, that would mean that we declare a namespace twice, once in the DTD and
> once in the XML document.  The redundancy bothers me.  What would make sense
> is associating a prefix with a namespace for use in the DTD, but making sure
> that it would not have to be the same prefix as the document uses (as long
> as the actual namespace uri is the same):

Exactly what I meant.

-- 
John Cowan <jcowan@r...>     http://www.reutershealth.com
I amar prestar aen, han mathon ne nen,    http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
han mathon ne chae, a han noston ne 'wilith.  --Galadriel, _LOTR:FOTR_

• References:
  • Re: Come On, DTD, Come On! Thoughts on DSDL Part 9
    • From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Come On, DTD, Come On! Thoughts on DSDL Part 9
• Next by Date: Re: Come On, DTD, Come On! Thoughts on DSDL Part 9
• Previous by thread: Re: Come On, DTD, Come On! Thoughts on DSDL Part 9
• Next by thread: Re: Come On, DTD, Come On! Thoughts on DSDL Part 9
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread