> From: michael josenhans <address@hidden>
> Tom Lord wrote:
> > > From: Tupshin Harper <address@hidden>
> > > DTDs can't handle this level of specifity, but XSDs can. <soapbox>dtds
> > > suck...should be deprecated in all applications...down with dtds</soapbox>
> > So, formally, are XSDs turing complete?
> They are more complete than DTD's, as they include ranges etc. The main
> thing which is still missing, is you are not able to define dependencies
> between nodes.
> E.g.:
> You use 10 different stypes in the text as refernces. But you have only
> defined 9 of them. YOou can use ID_REF for such purpose, however this is
> often too limited.
Do you know what "turing complete" means?
I'm sorry but this exchange exemplifies some of why I think W3C is
responsible for having crashed the industry.