On Tue, 2013-04-09 at 19:38 -0300, Timothy W. Cook wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Liam R E Quin <> wrote:
>
> > If the DTD or Schema conflicts with what's in the primary text, the
> > primary text is what's right, not the schema. This is referred to in the
> > literature as descriptive markup.
> >
> > Liam
>
> Really?
>
> Well, that closes Simon's argument then. There is absolutely no need
> for a schema. Since it does nothing.
> If the primary document is always the correct source, without
> question. No need for schemas.
For this particular use case - representing a document as it actually
exists - if you find a poem in the index or a letter from the editor's
aunt in a glossary (I have seen both) then the DTD or Schema had beeter
allow those things.
The existence of descriptive markup does not rule out a case for
prescriptive markup.
Best,
Liam
--
Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/
Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org freenode/#xml
