W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org > October 1996

Re: C.4 Undeclared entities?

From: Len Bullard <cbullard@HiWAAY.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 12:01:35 -0500
Message-ID: <3270F26F.4B61@HiWAAY.net>
To: Jon Bosak <bosak@atlantic-83.Eng.Sun.COM>
CC: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
Jon Bosak wrote:
> 
> 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.

No quarrel.  Just keep in mind that validatibility and parameterizing
the editor are very powerful requirements in the minds and contracts 
of others who will be buying these systems.  I noted this to Michael
and I note it to the list, without provably correct well-formed
instances 
where that correctness is tested under conditions of a formal 
agreement whose own validity is testable, XML is a non-starter.
The PDF/Formal Fixed Non-Revisable guys will have a field day.
Whether correct by test, or correct by construction, formal legal 
proof is required.  A DTD is easier to build than a test script
and much easier to share and interoperate.

C'mon guys.  You are screwing this pooch just to prove who has the 
smallest parser.  Kind of macho in reverse.

len
Received on Friday, 25 October 1996 13:01:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:25:04 UTC