Architectural forms give you that.
> I want to write a scientific research paper quickly.
The key word here is *quickly*. Architectural forms don't give you that.
> It should be *possible* to create a DTD to which such a document
> complies, but I am not as interested in automatic validation of a
> namespace document. The interrelational issues are, I think, too
> complex to solve; in the example above, I would need to change the
> text-containing HTML elements' content models to include chemical and
> mathematical markup, and maybe allow HTML markup in MathML theorems.
> Pushing selected information into the content models is too ugly.
These issues are not complex at all.
They are all handled nicely by the Japanese proposal. In a "modular
world", HTML would become a module that takes parameters such as
"object-types", "character span types", "block types" and so forth. You
pass in "MathML::Formula" as an "object-type" and the HTML %figure-type;
entity gets updated to reflect it. The issue is only complex in the
example you site because HTML was not designed to be modular because
SGML does not have a concept of DTD modules.
Even so, this is already dirt-common in SGML applications that don't
even *have* modules. You define a parameter entity and include the
entity.
"<!-- In order to use the CALS table model, various parameter entity
declarations are required. A brief description is as follows:
..."
The only extra thing we need from modules is the namespace management
that helps us to avoid name clashes and a way to sneak parameter
entities or element names into the contained namespace.
Paul Prescod
-- http://itrc.uwaterloo.ca/~paprescoxml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message; (un)subscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)