After reading the paper bellow, just a quick thought.
Is there any reason why XSLT-like validator would not be feasible?

XSLT is very powerful, you do not need to learn a new syntax as XSL will
be commonplace in a couple of years. We could do calculations inside
XSL-DTD, we could have a very fine control over document structure, ...
.

Don Park wrote:
> 
> Rick,
> 
> I completely agree with your conclusion.  DTD [expletive deleted], XML-Schema is only
> marginally better, we need something more flexible.  You might be interested
> in reading an interesting paper Dave Raggett (the HTML 4.0, Tidy guy) wrote
> that includes your 'parent model' idea.  The paper is at:
> 
> http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett/dtdgen/Docs/
> 
> I wouldn't mind having this 'Assertion Grammars' replace the current
> XML-Schema proposal.  Frankly, I am tired of tip-toeing around what W3C
> thinks is the right way of doing things.
> 
> I had a great time reading it and I am sure it will definitely shake some of
> you up.  It is a must read for everyone.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Don Park    -   mailto:donpark@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Docuverse   -   http://www.docuverse.com
> 
> xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@xxxxxxxx
> Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
> To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@xxxxxxxx the following message;
> (un)subscribe xml-dev
> To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@xxxxxxxx the following message;
> subscribe xml-dev-digest
> List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@xxxxxxxx)

-- 
***************************************************************
Dr. Miloslav Nic                        e-mail: nicmila@xxxxxxxx
Department of Organic Chemistry         TEL: +420 2 2435 5012  
ICT Prague (VSCHT Praha)                     +420 2 2435 4118
    				        FAX: +420 2 2435 4288  
****************************************************************


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list