- From: Russell Steven Shawn O'Connor <roconnor@uwaterloo.ca>
- Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2000 20:28:12 -0500 (EST)
- To: W3C HTML <www-html@w3.org>
I don't understand Murry's point of view in this arguement.
Murry seems to be claiming that some kind (any kind) of validation is
needed. The only tools validate against a DTD, therefore we need to
validate against the DTD.
The counter claim is that since the DTD can't all the syntax required,
then we don't even have validation when using an SGML tool. For example I
expect
<ol>
<li type="disc">foo</li>
</ol>
will validate but is clearly syntacitcally incorrect.
So given that DTD checked doesn't even meet the bare requirements that you
ask of it, and given that a DTD limits the author in other nasty ways, why
are you so insitant on maintaining it?
--
Russell O'Connor roconnor@uwaterloo.ca
<http://www.undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca/~roconnor/>
``Paradoxically, a refusal to `put a monetary value on life' means that
life is often undervalued.'' -- Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach
Received on Wednesday, 19 January 2000 20:28:16 UTC