> I think we need an XML with 2 base profiles: one that supports DTDs and does
> not support namespaces, and one that supports namespaces but does not
> support DTDs. The latter would require a namespace-aware schema language if
> you want to do validation.
But unless you bless a particular schema language (say, RelaxNG)
you'd be removing substantial functionality from that latter "profile".
And as we all know, there's no single schema language that's most
worthy of blessing.
I think such profiling is needed, but is better done outside of the
core XML specification.
- Dave
