> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Cramer [mailto:]
> Sent: Wednesday, 2011 December 14 22:45
> To:
> Subject: Re: [docbook] DTD for DocBook?
>
> On 12/14/2011 10:53 AM, Norman Walsh wrote:
> > Getting a reasonable XSD for DocBook V5.x is a step closer to a
> > DTD, but it's not a DTD. Does anyone care?
> >
>
> I doubt it. The use case for alternative schemas is in-editor
> validation, right? AFAIK, all the editors that don't support RelaxNG
> do support XSD:
>
> oXygen: RelaxNG, XSD, DTD
> XMLMind: RelaxNG, XSD, DTD
> emacs+nxml: RelaxNG
> XMetaL: XSD, DTD
> Serna: XSD
> Epic: ????
>
PTC's Arbortext (aka Epic) does support XSD. It also supports
Schematron validation--though not RelaxNG currently--so one
can use a combination of XSD plus Schematron rules to validate
ones DocBook content.
paul
