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

Re: DTD and Illegal Construct

• From: James Clark <jjc@j...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 11:27:07 +0700

It seems relatively easy to rewrite individual content models to
workaround the restriction on ambiguity.  Where I find it much more of a
nuisance is the way it makes parameterization harder.  For example,
imagine something like

<!ENTITY % local.emph.class "">
<!ENTITY % emph.class "emph|phrase %local.emph.class;">

<!ENTITY % local.tech.class "">
<!ENTITY % tech.class "code|var %local.tech.class;">

<!ELEMENT eg (#PCDATA|%emph.class;)*>
<!ELEMENT p (#PCDATA|%emph.class;|%tech.class;)*>

Now suppose I want to allow the var element everywhere the emph element
is allowed (ie inside eg).  In my internal subset I do:

<!ENTITY % local.emph.class "|var">

Then I get hit with an ambiguity in the content model for p.

TREX avoids this annoyance by fully supporting ambiguous content
models.  I believe RELAX does also.

James

• References:
  • RE: DTD and Illegal Construct
    • From: Richard Tobin <richard@c...>

• Prev by Date: Re: DTD and Illegal Construct
• Next by Date: Re: Should xlink:arcrole or xlink:role be the primary way to dispatchon related resources? was Re: URIs, names and well known RDDL names,
• Previous by thread: RE: DTD and Illegal Construct
• Next by thread: Re: RDDL: Should xlink:arcrole or xlink:role be the primary way todispatch on related resources?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread