W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > February 2004

ORA-XQ-138-B: some EBNF rules stated better in XML 1.0 Recommendation

From: Stephen Buxton <Stephen.Buxton@oracle.com>
Date: 16 Feb 04 13:23:41
Message-Id: <200402162123.i1GLNfG15052@rgmgw5.us.oracle.com>
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Cc:

SECTION A.1: EBNF

Some of the non-terminals duplicate definitions found in XML 1.0,
namely rule [106] CDataSection is the same as rule [18] CDSect
in XML 1.0; rule [107] XmlPI is the same as rule [16] PI in
XML 1.0, and rule [108] XmlComment is the same as rule [15]
Comment in XML 1.0.  Actually, the rules are stated better in
XML 1.0, since that document is careful to exclude the 
terminating symbols where your rules just have Char*.
It would be better to just cite the XML 1.0 definitions.

- Steve B.
Received on Monday, 16 February 2004 16:23:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:45:17 UTC