Re: XML-Data: advantages over DTD syntax?

Henry S. Thompson (ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk)
Fri, 3 Oct 97 10:41:27 BST

Rick writes:
> I call as exhibit #1 FrameMaker's EDD (element description definition???)
> format. The developers of XML-data should look hard at it, and the
> lessons to be drawn from it. It seems to have been conceived as a
> better SGML than SGML (Frame also had an additional requirement to
> embed structure into their interchange format too).

I have no experience with it, but I'll make an effort soon to have a
look, thanks.

> For exhibit #2, I call the Pinnacles or DOCBOOK DTDs, expressed
> in XML-data. Can someone whip it up, and we can get a much better
> feel for how readable it is as a declaration syntax for a nice
> juicy DTD? The number of derived element types will probably be
> much fewer than the number of base element types, surely. Without
> exhibit #2, I really don't feel comfortable making claims that
> XML-data is verbose (or reading claims that is is more transparent!)

Absolutely right. I hope by SGML 97 in Washington to have done
exactly this (although I'm likely to use the TEI DTD).

ht