[relaxng-user] "Converting DTDs (and DTD developers) to RELAX NG schemas" paper

[David.Pawson at rnib.org.uk]

Daniel said:
      Well there is the relatively harsh (but fair at the time) 
    comparison he posted on the ietf-xml-use mailing list
      http://www.imc.org/ietf-xml-use/mail-archive/msg00217.html

thanks Daniel.
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2002Jun/0119.html
also.
    

      Since it's far far easier to validate the semantic of a 
    Relax-NG Schemas it seems to me that doing the opposite way 
    (i.e. having the Relax-NG master and relying on automatic 
    generation for the XSD) is more likely to garantee the 
    semantic of both schemas,
I'd agree. I'm less sure that I can persuade a bean counter who has
heard of the words though :-)
  Remember that phrase, you never get the sack for buying big blue?

regards DaveP

- 
DISCLAIMER: 

NOTICE: The information contained in this email and any attachments is 
confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended 
recipient you should not use, disclose, distribute or copy any of the 
content of it or of any attachment; you are requested to notify the 
sender immediately of your receipt of the email and then to delete it 
and any attachments from your system. 

RNIB endeavours to ensure that emails and any attachments generated by 
its staff are free from viruses or other contaminants. However, it 
cannot accept any responsibility for any  such which are transmitted.
We therefore recommend you scan all attachments. 

Please note that the statements and views expressed in this email and 
any attachments are those of the author and do not necessarily represent 
those of RNIB. 

RNIB Registered Charity Number: 226227 

Website: http://www.rnib.org.uk