- From: Jon Bosak <bosak@atlantic-83.Eng.Sun.COM>
- Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 09:30:29 -0700
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
- CC: bosak@atlantic-83.Eng.Sun.COM
[Charles Goldfarb:] | I hope someone can prove me wrong by rebutting the following | proposition (formal mathematical proof not required): | | XML without a DTD is no different from HTML extended by the ability to | "add tags and attributes" just by defining processing for the | additions in a style sheet (cascading or otherwise). A well-formed XML document without a DTD describes a logical tree of arbitrary depth. HTML does not, unless you overload the DIV tag in ways that are horrible to contemplate. This is a difference. [Tim Bray:] | Whether in fact there is much, other than display, that you can | usefully do to an SGML document without having a DTD, is something | that only the market will decide. Some of us have already decided. I put documents totalling hundreds of thousands of pages of SGML online using a tool in which the DTD was optional except for EMPTY elements and entity declarations. The result supported every operation that I wanted to perform on those documents, including a variety of rather complex structural queries. While there are no doubt many applications for which such a system would be inadequate, I found that SGML without a DTD provided me with everything that I wanted SGML to do as a publishing medium, with the single exception of validation. A lot of other DynaText/DynaWeb users found this out, too. I predict that a lot of XML users will come to the same conclusion. Jon
Received on Friday, 25 October 1996 12:32:18 UTC