No. As of EML 2.0.0 we are no longer creating DTDs as part of the EML release. Only XML Schemas will be released. Even then, there are some EML rules which are not expressible in XML Schema and for which you must use a specialized validator, such as the "EML Parser" that ships with the distribution.

You even can use different DTDs according to your situation (production/development), probobly put in a property/configuration file. If the third party XML has no DTD: You can use xslt to transform your xml string to a new one. See complete instructions here: Controlling the DOCTYPE and XML Declaration If you don't want to change the XML file or string, you can set an equivalent schema. Schema can be specified on processing time.

EML stands for Ecological Metadata Language. It exists as a set of XML Schema documents that allow for the structural expression of metadata necessary to document a typical data set in the ecological sciences.

You can't. The public validators do not have a DTD that has support for frames. If you use your own DTD, you can make the following changes to it to add support for frames: Replace <!ENTITY % html.content "HEAD, BODY, PLAINTEXT?"> with <!ENTITY % html.

It is not complete - if you add new tasks via <taskdef> it won't know about it. See this page by Michel Casabianca for a solution to this problem. Note that the DTD you can download at this page is based on Ant 0.3.1. It may even be an invalid DTD.

In a previous version, EML packages (via RDF like triples) supported linking across packages, so you could re-use the same document in multiple packages. In EML 2.0.0 Release Candidate 1 we redesigned the packaging structure to only allow linking within a single package. Thus, one could re-use a party description or attribute list within a package, but not across several. This is a compromise that keeps some reusability but has fewer management problems.

Depends on who you ask, my answer is, no, they don't. There are some that believe that to meet the promise of Web standards that every page on a site needs to validate against the W3C's validators While I would agree that this can be helpful and a goal to strive for, I don't think it's necessary. There are varying levels of standards compliance and some common Web technologies either won't validate or need special workarounds.

The first two released versions of EML, EML 1.0 and EML 1.4.1 were developed at the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis (NCEAS), University of California at Santa Barbara, in Santa Barbara, California USA. The effort to produce EML 2.x (and all of the beta releases preceding it) is organized through the EML Project, an open source, community oriented project dedicated to providing a high-quality metadata specification for describing data relevant to the ecological discipline.

eml is an RFC 822 internet standard message format that can be read by Netscape and Microsoft Outlook Express. We recommend Outlook Express or Netscape as a viewer for .eml messages. The advantage that we get out of this is that full fidelity is maintained with rich messages. This is not possible with zip files since these require that the whole be built from the composing elements. Try pasting an entire web page and sending it to get a feel for the power that this approach affords!

HTML 3.2 does not support the element SPAN nor the attributes: STYLE, CLASS, ID as well as the element's LINK attributes; TYPE and TITLE therefore usage of them will be flagged as errors. Documents can be validated against "HTML 3.2 + CSS1"-DTD, which was written by W3C solely for the purpose of allowing style in HTML 3.2 documents to validate. However, this DTD does not support the attribute TYPE which is essential in specifying the style language used. To validate against HTML 3.

Strictly speaking, validity is an XML 1.0 concept that means to check that an XML document conforms to the rules in a DTD. In a more general sense, validation means to check that an XML document conforms to the rules in any XML schema, regardless of the schema language used.

We don't validate the XML document. The parser Verity uses is called expat. It is not a validating parser, but it does check for well-formed XML. If the document is not well-formed XML, it will be skipped during indexing. You cannot get expat to recover from errors. Errors related to poorly formed XML stop processing. Note that the XML Recommendation does not permit conforming XML processors to continue normal processing after a fatal error.

In order to validate your RIB documents, please use RIB in conjunction with RAVEN. You can either use the RAVEN Eclipse perspective in order to validate your GUI as it is displayed in the RIB Document View, or you can compile the generated application and validate it using the RAVEN External Perspective.

It means that you have executed a plugin multiple times with the same <id>. Provide each <execution> with a unique <id> then it would be ok.

Some women suggest staying in bed with a pillow under their hips or legs raised in the "bicycle" position for at least 20 minutes after sex. Others say it makes no difference if you get up right away. The choice is yours!

When we started developing MusicXML, a DTD (Document Type Definition) was the only official W3C recommendation for defining an XML document. Since that time, XML Schemas have become an official W3C recommendation, and alternative schema languages like RELAX NG have also become available. W3C XML Schemas offer many benefits when using XML in electronic commerce and business database applications. For musical documents, though, the advantages are less compelling.

You would use a "strict" DTD to validate your code if you wanted to eliminate presentational markup and go with a CSS based layout (no tables for layout being the biggest reason to do this) and you would use "transitional" if you wanted to ease into XHTML by using some of HTML's presentation elements (tables mainly).