- From: Michael Leventhal <mle@citec.fi>
- Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 18:04:52 +0200
- To: www-dom@w3.org
At 10:30 AM 12/28/98 -0500, you wrote: >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 Again, I apologize for barging in and asking someone to rehash something already said many times over. But ... may I ask if it would be appropriate at this stage to consider or even to make a specific proposal introducing a very small set of methods which would today use information gotten from the DTD, perhaps later from a schema, and would provide something quite useful without covering the full expressiveness (or, if you will, arcaneness) of a DTD? For example, I could do quite a lot with only a single method which would return the set of elements permitted in a context. I personally think it is needed in level 2 although it may well be less important that the 4 work items selected and, yes, I did not participate in the prior discussions anyway. But if the process is such that such an idea could be entertained I do volunteer to do the work on making a proposal which respects the overall objectives of Level 2. Michael Leventhal Michael Leventhal mle@citec.fi Architecture/Development +358 6 324 0738 CiTEC Information Technology +358 50 537 6091 (GSM)
Received on Monday, 28 December 1998 11:07:22 UTC