W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org > May 1997

AW: Is ist always possible to define a DTD for Well Formed XMLDocume nts?

From: Weichel Bernhard (K3/EES4) <Bernhard.Weichel@pcm.bosch.de>
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 16:00:07 +0200
Message-ID: <c=DE%a=DBP%p=BOSCH-01%l=SIMAIL-970527140007Z-400@si11724.si.bosch.de>
To: "'w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org'" <w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org>

>Von: 	Michael Sperberg-McQueen[SMTP:U35395@UICVM.UIC.EDU]
>Gesendet: 	Freitag, 23. Mai 1997 01:49
>An: 	W3C SGML Working Group
>Betreff: 	Re: Is ist always possible to define a DTD for Well Formed
>XMLDocume nts?
>>The question is in other words: Is it always possible to "upgrade" a WF
>>document to a valid document.  Yes, it is always possible to define a
>>DTD using the contentspec 'ANY'.  But this gives no validity information
>>at all.
>You started by asking the question "is there always a DTD?"  The answer
>is yes, as you've just demonstrated.  And by the only definition of
>validity that I know, it *does* produce validity information.  The
>document matches the DTD; the document is valid.  Q.E.D.
>Now you seem to be wanting to restrict the question to 'good' or
>'real' DTDs.  I know that Tim leans that way, too.  You're chasing
>a chimera.

I did not really ask for a grammar generator. My point was, that there
be another level of "well formedness", where an XML can rely on a known
even if the document is not parsed using a DTD, which lead me to the
of "well structured" documents.

I also donīt want to specify quality levels of DTDs. 
My intention was to make it easier to handle XML documents:

	use a simple parser (non validating parser)
	make application simple and robust by having a limited set of structure
		in this case, the DTD-reference is a kind of "contract"

Regards/Mit freundlichen Gruessen
Bernhard Weichel              Phone:  (49) 711 811 8322
Robert Bosch GmbH               Fax:  (49) 711 811 8262
Dept. K3/EES4                 eMail:  bernhard.weichel@pcm.bosch.de
P.O. Box 30 02 40                     
D-70442 Stuttgart

My recend postings had attached the same stuff again as MS-Exchange.
This did not happen with other internet mails. So I try it again here
apologizing in advance
if it happens again which this mailing list.
Received on Tuesday, 27 May 1997 15:14:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:26 UTC