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

Re: Come On, DTD, Come On! Thoughts on DSDL Part 9

• To: aray@n... (Arjun Ray)
• Subject: Re: Come On, DTD, Come On! Thoughts on DSDL Part 9
• From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 00:11:59 -0400 (EDT)
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <alpiguk12naljkff65g3d0toln9obgghtr@4...> from "Arjun Ray" at Jun 14, 2002 03:47:15 AM

Arjun Ray scripsit:

>   (1) Token or not
>   (2) If token, single or multiple
>   (3) If token, referential or not
>   (4) In any case, subject to data content notation or not

But if multiple tokens, then the data content notation should apply
to each token, *not* to the entire list of tokens.  That's my point.

Also we need lexical types TOKEN and TOKENS, not just NMTOKEN(S).

> This would be radically changing the purpose of notation declarations,
> which is associating a local document specific name with an external
> identifier, the latter being a formal means of "stating" a concept.  

I agree this is unnecessary if you allow TOKENS as a lexical type.

>   <!ENTITY % foo  ' A | B | C' >
>   <!ENTITY % bar  ', D, E' >
>   <!ENTITY % quux  '%foo; %bar;' >
> 
>   <!ATTLIST (%quux)  blort CDATA #IMPLIED>

What is the difference between | and , separators?  The only one that
makes sense to me is | (choice).

> IOW, I would reserve the infix separators ('|', ',' and '&') for model
> groups only, where they are indeed convenient.  We *are* whiteboarding
> syntax, no?

We are, though only in the trial-balloon mode.  The Committee isn't
ready to think about syntax yet.

> Yes, but there's more to it.  Does/will the schema purport to describe
> "everything" in the document, or just some determinate part of it? 

Good question.

> I'd say the application invokes it, through some interface that allows
> specification of the relevant declarations (and I suppose, the root).  But
> I don't see how this is relevant to DTD syntax.

Well, the declaration of doc-elem-form is inside the DTD.

-- 
John Cowan <jcowan@r...>     http://www.reutershealth.com
I amar prestar aen, han mathon ne nen,    http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
han mathon ne chae, a han noston ne 'wilith.  --Galadriel, _LOTR:FOTR_

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Come On, DTD, Come On! Thoughts on DSDL Part 9
    • From: Arjun Ray <aray@n...>

• References:
  • Re: Come On, DTD, Come On! Thoughts on DSDL Part 9
    • From: Arjun Ray <aray@n...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Periodic plea for a bit of throttling back
• Next by Date: Re: Come On, DTD, Come On! Thoughts on DSDL Part 9
• Previous by thread: Re: Come On, DTD, Come On! Thoughts on DSDL Part 9
• Next by thread: Re: Come On, DTD, Come On! Thoughts on DSDL Part 9
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread