I'd love to have DTD support for these features. I'll use Schema in 
situations where I have no other practical choice, and RELAX-NG is at 
least an interesting alternative, but I absolutely prefer using DTDs.

I know this has been debated ad nauseam, but my preference is to have 
the schema only describe the structure of the document and leave the 
data validation to the application. This is because (1) I'm unwilling to 
trust schema validation by the parser in my code - if somebody changes 
the schema I don't want it creating a buffer overrun (well, an 
ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException anyway - you can't actually *do* buffer 
overruns in Java...) in the application; and (2) there are generally 
constraints on the data which cannot be expressed in the schema language 
(interdependencies between values, or dependencies on external values).

  - Dennis

G. Ken Holman wrote:

>  I'd be interested to hear from others if they think DTD syntax is even 
>  needed for the features we've quoted here ... or will people just rely 
>  on Part 2 (RELAX-NG) for their grammar needs?
> 
>  Should we even bother with a Part 9?  Why?  We aren't doing this for 
>  an academic exercise ... we want to reach the constituency of document 
>  modelers out there, many of whom are still using DTD syntax.
> 
>  ............ Ken 



-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org> , an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> 

The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>