Re: some topics we haven't yet discussed
At 11:29 AM 9/24/96 -0400, Murray Maloney wrote:
>Now, back to DTDs. I want someting that I can work with in
>one tool. I want to be able to read and write a DTD. I want
>to be able to declare an element type and its attributes,
>and I want to be able to explain the whys and wherefores
>right there in the DTD in such a way that a downstream
>processor can produce reasonable documentation. I also
>want to be able to _add_ attributes to an element type.
>(That is, I want to be able to have multiple attribute
>declarations that affect the same element type. And no ,
>I don't think that parameter entities are good enough.)
I think we're all pretty much in aggreement that using SGML markup for
representing a document type is probably a good thing. What Charles and I
are saying is that XML is not the venue to do it because the design must be
done with a degree of care that would make the effort take longer than we
have to do the XML design.
There are a lot of different ways such a thing could be done and a lot of
subtle implications of doing it. It's not even a certainty that it is a
good thing in the long run.
I certainly apply the principle of representing non-SGML things with SGML
(i.e., my DTD for VRML), but it's easy to it unilaterally and for your own
purposes, as everyone whose already done their own DTD for DTDs has
demonstrated. Doing something that will satisfy the requirements and
constraints of a user base as large and varied as the SGML/XML/HTML
community is a very different matter.
W. Eliot Kimber (email@example.com)
Senior SGML Consultant and HyTime Specialist
Passage Systems, Inc., (512)339-1400
10596 N. Tantau Ave., Cupertino, CA 95014-3535 (408) 366-0300, (408)
2608 Pinewood Terrace, Austin, TX 78757 (512) 339-1400 (fone/fax)
http://www.passage.com (work) http://www.drmacro.com (home)
"If I never had existed, would you still remember me?..."
--Austin Lounge Lizards, "1984 Blues"