Re: XML and required DTDs

At 12:56 PM 09/14/96 CDT, Paul Grosso wrote:

>If DTDs are optional for XML editors, someone will write an XML editor
>that edits a document without a DTD.  I would like to explore this
>avenue more.  (I am not necessarily against this--I can see some
>advantages--but I think it has lots of ramifications.)  

This is certainly true, but even if DTDs are *required* someone will write
an editor that is capable of editing even without them. This has long been
the case with SGML, for which vi, emacs, and xedit are quite popular editors
(alas!), and they are far less capable than that: they not only *can*
function without a DTD, they *can't* make use of one if they are given one
(these are quite different criteria). 

Even if you don't have a DTD around, there's a vast different between a hex
dump of a GIF file, and an SGML document that's valid under a
straightforward DTD. Why not take advantage of the difference so the SGML
system can just deal?