Re: [docbook] DTD from extended RNC

[Peter Flynn <peter@silmaril.ie>]

On 21/05/18 13:17, Dave Pawson wrote:
[...]
> Peter is also on this list. IMHO he is biased :-)

Yes, guilty as charged :-)

nxml is a fine mode for editing "data" XML, and perhaps even for editing
existing text, but it is hopelessly unsuitable for *writing* — that is,
using XML when you are authoring a real-life "document" document from
scratch. It lacks the editorial controls present in psgml (which in turn
has omissions of its own: nothing is perfect). nxml and psgml both need
to be brought in line with the many typographical XML editors and given
a better user interface.

Both are perfectly capable of being used, but the pain factor is far
lower with psgml *when you are an author writing* an article, book,
thesis, etc. Documentation is an edge case: some doc just has a list of
menus and functions and a short sentence about each; other doc has more
expository text and requires a more extensive set of controls to write
or edit effectively.

>    Anything you can do with a DTD you can do with rng/rnc.

Correct. Which is why, if you want a DTD, the best way to do it is to
use RNC to model the document type, and then emit DTD by transformation.
It is a popular conceit to assume that DTDs are on the way out.

///Peter