[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Wikipedia on XML
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 06:09:58PM -0700, Kurt Cagle wrote: >> Keep in mind audience here. I'd be inclined rather to indicate that an >> XML >> document is a valid SGML document as well, > > Strictly speaking, any valid (i.e. DTD-valid) XML document is also > valid SGML document. Strictly speaking, a well-formed document with no DTD conforms to SGML too: it is a "fully-tagged" "tag-valid" document. http://www1.y12.doe.gov/capabilities/sgml/wg8/document/1929.htm > The relationship between SGML and XML is really only meaningful > for XML documents with actual DTDs. Help! Liam is stuck in a time warp in 1995! > It's not usefully the case that > there's an implicit document type declaration, and although the > vague and all-encompassing SGML definition of a document type > definition might be said to apply to any document, such a remark > would merely be vacuous sophistry. There's no assumption that there > is a DTD for any XML document. There is no assumption that there is a DTD for an SGML document either, since the 1997/1998 changes to cope with SGML. "A conforming SGML document must be either a type-valid SGML document, a tag-valid SGML document, or both. Note: If there is a document type declaration, the instance can be parsed with or without reference to it." Cheers Rick Jelliffe
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
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
|