Re: AW: [dss] Comments on DSS Core Protocol WD 26

[Rich Salz <rsalz@datapower.com>]

> >Since DTDs are not namespace aware, you cannot support the grammar that
> >tells the parser which elements could have ID attributes, with a DTD in
> >this case. If you write
> >
> ><!ATTLIST child
> >   Id ID #IMPLIED
> > >
> >
> >you cannot distinguish between child in the foo ns and the child in the
> >bar ns, but you had to ...


The way this is usually done is to use explicit namespace declarations
(xmlns:foo, and makea the DTD element name match the qname used in the
document.  For example
  <!ATTLIST dss:child Id ID #IMPLIED>
and make sure the dss namespace is declared, or defined in prose.


> I don't know DTDs enough to assess this.  Won't schemas be larger and more
> complex?  Do other people want to switch to schemas?

Are there many specs still defined in DTD?

Since DSS is so namespace-aware and -dependant, it seems silly to use a
definition language that is namespace-ignorant.

	/r$

--
Rich Salz                  Chief Security Architect
DataPower Technology       http://www.datapower.com
XS40 XML Security Gateway  http://www.datapower.com/products/xs40.html
XML Security Overview      http://www.datapower.com/xmldev/xmlsecurity.html