[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: JUMBO

• From: Sam Hunting <sgmlsh@C...>
• To: "Norbert H. Mikula" <nmikula@e...>
• Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 08:49:14 -0500 (EST)

> People didn't seem to be too interested in my idea of an interface for
> passing along a complete grove. At least I didn't get too much 
> feedback.

I'm interested -- isn't it true that a grove is the best way to prove (as
opposed to asserting, or wishing) that an XML instance really is an SGML
subset? Or to show where it is "impure"? (Certainly superior to parsing
the instance with one or aonther parser and looking at the errors.)

This would be important if a supplier is under a contractual obligation to
provide SGML to a buyer, and wishes to provide XML. 








xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To unsubscribe, send to majordomo@i... the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (rzepa@i...)

• References:
  • Re: JUMBO
    • From: "Norbert H. Mikula" <nmikula@e...>

• Prev by Date: Writing about XML
• Next by Date: Restriction on PI information
• Previous by thread: Re: JUMBO
• Next by thread: Re: JUMBO
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread