Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Michael Ludwig<milu71@g...> wrote: > So given the rest is pretty useful and the DTD syntax and functionality > is really easy to learn and understand, why should it have been a > mistake to include this great bag of features in XML? The internal DTD subset has been a world of hurt for parser implementers. It's really what pushes XML over the edge out of the realm of the Desperate Perl Hacker. It makes parsers much more complex, and arguably slower. It also introduces some security issues that wouldn't otherwise be present. Were we starting over today, I would argue strongly in favor of eliminating the internal DTD subset entirely and leaving the definition of the schema language outside the spec so that the DOCTYPE could point to schemas in different languages which parser vendors would be free to implement or not as they chose. -- Elliotte Rusty Harold elharo@i...
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
