• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: DTDs still widely used ? was RE: Namespaces A Mess?
• From: Vladimir Gapeyev <vgapeyev@s...>
• Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 15:51:18 -0400 (EDT)
• In-reply-to: <216A47D0C2D1574B9A9169A664C376FDEFBB2F@L...>
• References: <216A47D0C2D1574B9A9169A664C376FDEFBB2F@L...>

On Mon, 17 Oct 2005, DuCharme, Bob (LNG-CHO) wrote:
> bryan rasmussen writes:
>> A very unscientific quick check on the usage of DTDs...
> Your search looks for XML documents on the public web that have the word
> "doctype" and are in Google's index, which is not a good indicator of how
> much XML people are using that points to DTDs.

In this regard, I'd also wonder how frequent it is that XML documents do 
not contain any DOCTYPE declarations, but are neveretheless maintained as 
valid w.r.t. to some external DTDs?  (The same wonder applies to the other 
schema languages, of course.)

VG

• References:
  • RE: DTDs still widely used ? was RE: Namespaces A Mess?
    • From: "DuCharme, Bob (LNG-CHO)" <bob.ducharme@l...>

• Prev by Date: Re: DTDs still widely used ? was RE: Namespaces A Mess?
• Next by Date: VTD-XML an open-source, high-performance and non-extractive XML processing API
• Previous by thread: Re: DTDs still widely used ? was RE: Namespaces A Mess?
• Next by thread: RE: DTDs still widely used ? was RE: Namespaces A Mess?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread