• From: Stefan Mintert <sm@i...>
• To: xml-dev@i...
• Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 14:40:32 +0100

Hi!


Production [52] of the XML spec reads

       AttlistDecl ::= '<!ATTLIST' S Name AttDef* S? '>'


A legal AttlistDecl would be

	<!ATTLIST>


What's the purpose of an empty AttlistDecl?
Shouldn't production [52] read instead as follows?

       AttlistDecl ::= '<!ATTLIST' S Name AttDef+ S? '>'

(+ instead of *)




Why was a "Possibly empty attribute definition list" (K.4.4.1, 
[142], ISO 8879 TC 2, http://www.sgmlsource.com/8879rev/n1955.htm) 
introduced in SGML with the latest revision?



Thanks in advance for any answer!



Bye,

  Stefan.

+-----------------------------------------------------------+
  Stefan Mintert        
       UniDo:    mintert@i...
       private:  stefan@m...
       WWW:      http://www.informatik.uni-dortmund.de/~sm/
+-----------------------------------------------------------+


        "let the music keep our spirits high..."

                                (Jackson Browne)

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

• Follow-Ups:
  • Empty AttlistDecl
    • From: David Megginson <ak117@f...>

• Prev by Date: SDATA or UNICODE
• Next by Date: Empty AttlistDecl
• Previous by thread: SDATA or UNICODE
• Next by thread: Empty AttlistDecl
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread