[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
John Cowan <jcowan@r...> wrote: | Arjun Ray scripsit: | But if multiple tokens, then the data content notation should apply | to each token, *not* to the entire list of tokens. Agreed. |> <!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? Here, none. Which, IMHO, is just unnecessary uglification. | The only one that makes sense to me is | (choice). Semantically, yes. But what happens in SGML is that the same PE gets used in model groups (with one purpose) and in ATTLISTs (with another): this is why the syntax of a parenthesized set of associated element types allows any mix-and-match of separators from model group syntax. (I suppose my real agenda is putting PEs out to pasture, so I'd like a syntax that works *against* "re-suing" PEs for model groups in other declarations where there is no semantic other than choice.) |> 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. Actually, it isn't. There is no requirement (AFAIK) that the ArchUse PI appear within the subsets of a document type declaration - it can be a free standing PI in the document instance (ie another part of the prolog.)
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|