- From: Jon Bosak <bosak@atlantic-83.Eng.Sun.COM>
- Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 13:27:51 -0700
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
- CC: bosak@atlantic-83.Eng.Sun.COM
(Speaking only for myself) I have thought about Tim Bray's proposal to use the same syntax for instances and markup declarations and find that I am in complete agreement. 1. It makes no sense to claim that we have created a syntax suitable for the markup of structured data in general and then not use it for the markup of the structured document that defines a particular schema. From a marketing standpoint this is indefensible; from a logical standpoint it is absurd. I have heard no one deny this. 2. I am not qualified to certify the correctness of the proposed DSD syntax, but I can guarantee that it would be no harder to teach than the current DTD syntax, and I strongly suspect that it would be easier. 3. Unlike many other features -- marked sections, for example -- that we can defer for the moment if we wish and introduce in a later version of XML, this is not something that can wait. We have to take this approach from the beginning or it will never happen. If there are flaws in the DSD syntax included in the November draft, then early implementors will soon expose them, but if it's not in that draft, we're stuck with an illogical and indefensible failure to employ the very philosophy that we are espousing. I think we should do it. Jon
Received on Monday, 7 October 1996 16:29:41 UTC