Nathan,
The main obvious advantage of the Schema version over the DTD version of
EAD, and the main motivation for the development of the Schema version, is
to enable the embedding of instances in the EAD namespace within xml files
from another namespace -- most importantly METS. Simply put DTD doesn't
(really) support namespaces, Schema does*
/Terry
* although the Namespace-based Validation Dispatching Language (NVDL) does
allow the combining of xml elements from multiple schema languages in the
same document, but that's a whole other thing...
On Thu, 28 Apr 2011,
Nathan Tallman wrote:
> Mark's last email has prompted something that I've been meaning to ask
> this list for a while. What are the practical benefits of migrating to
> schema based EAD from DTD? I know that XML-wise, DTD is the older
> style and schema is the new, so that schema is the preferred new
> format. But, I don't think DTD support is going away anytime soon. Are
> people just trying to achieve the gold standard, or am I missing some
> other practical benefit. Is a schema easier to work with?
> Also, if someone wants to migrate from DTD to schema, are there any
> guides or other resources available? The EAD Tools & Helper Files page
> <http://www.archivists.org/saagroups/ead/tools.html> doesn't have
> anything. I'm assuming the EAD XML files will need more updating other
> than the DTD declaration, but maybe it's as easy as that...
>
> Thanks!
>
> Nathan Tallman
> Associate Archivist
> American Jewish Archives
>
>
Terry Catapano
Special Collections Analyst/Librarian
Columbia University Libraries Digital Program
212-854-9942
[log in to unmask]
|