On 2002-07-11 at 03:12 -0400, James K. Lowden wrote: > > In this case, ensuring validation would probably be a waste of > > time unless it was (very) trivial (which, incidentally, it > > might be if the appropriate XML libraries supported it). > > Do you mean "if they did, but they don't"?
No, I mean, if they do, which I think they probably should do, but I don't actually know. <grin> > I have in mind generating Dia files from external sources, > "sql2dia" if you will. Properly done, that would rely on the > DTD to determine the output structure. I'm not so sure that's true, is it? It depends on how much knowledge the generation/conversion utility has about .dia files, surely? If it was specific (as in the case of sql2dia), would not DTD validation just be a 'safety net' to ensure that sql2dia had not screwed up and accidentally created invalid .dia files? Surely it would have to be creating what it believed were valid .dia without reference to the DTD, unless it is going to read the DTD, parse it, understand it, and create files in accordance with it, in which case isn't it doing all the work of a DTD validator and more itself? > I think XML transformation tools will continue to improve, > making such things relatively easier over time. There are > many external data stores that would be easier (for people) > to read if they could be exported to Dia. Hmm, for XSLT and other transformation stuff I can't really comment --- I know the principles but not the details. -- Andrew Ferrier web: http://www.new-destiny.co.uk/andrew/ email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Dia-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/dia-list
