Re: Level 2 - DTDs?

At 04:44 PM 12/28/98 +0200, you wrote:
>I suspect this a very old issue - I have been following the
>mailing list for some time but haven't seen it discussed
>recently.  Are DTDs not on the agenda for Level 2?  I
>can imagine some reasons why that might be the case but
>would be grateful if someone could ever so briefly summarize
>the view which holds sway in the WG.

The WG laid out a long list of options on what to work on for Level 2
(based in large part on input from this mailing list), gave everyone 4
votes, and Range, Events, Style, and Iterators/Filters were the top 4 vote
getters.

The most often cited reason for not wanting to tackle DTDs in Level 2 was
that there is a lot of impetus to define a standard XML-syntax "schema" to
replace DTDs, and we didn't want to spend a lot of time supporting DTDs
only to find that we had produced an anachronism, so we thought that
waiting to see what the schema people came up with would be a good idea.
When Level 2 is done, obviously this needs to be reconsidered in light of
whatever progress is actually made toward coming up with a standard schema
language.

Mike Champion

Received on Monday, 28 December 1998 10:30:43 UTC