- From: Nir Dagan <nir@nirdagan.com>
- Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 09:22:46 +0300 (Israel Daylight Time)
- To: Alan Richmond <alan@encyclozine.com>
- cc: George Lund <george@lundboox.demon.co.uk>, www-html@w3.org
Another cost that may be saved with XML is the ability to parse (some) documents without a DTD. Retreiving a DTD across the internet and parsing it constitutes considerable bandwith, processing, and display time costs. regards, Nir Dagan http://www.nirdagan.com mailto:nir@nirdagan.com tel:+972-2-588-3143 "There is nothing quite so practical as a good theory." -- A. Einstein On Tue, 6 Jul 1999, Alan Richmond wrote: > At 08:45 PM 7/6/99 +0100, George Lund wrote: > >In article <4.2.0.56.19990706133440.00a94b80@pop.encyclozine.com>, Alan > >Richmond <alan@encyclozine.com> writes > [...] > > > I think the simplification was for people, not computers.. > > > >The stated goals of XML (in the W3C activity statement) make no mention > >of making life easier for people to hand code stuff, but they do say... > > "Its simple syntax is easy to process by machine, and has the > attraction of remaining understandable to humans. XML is based on SGML, and > is familiar in look and feel to those accustomed to HTML." I didn't say > 'hand coding', but perhaps I should have said 'programmers' instead of > 'people'. Granted that there are freely available SGML parsers, but > programmers still need to understand the syntax, i.e. DTD, and my > assumption is that the simpler syntax of XML (over SGML) was designed to > facilitate tools development. Else, as you say, why bother? > -- > Alan Richmond > http://EncycloZine.com/ Expand Your Universe > http://WDVL.com/ The Web Developer's Virtual Library > [founder and former managing editor of WDVL]
Received on Wednesday, 7 July 1999 02:24:41 UTC