> I think you're missing Charles' point: that one goal is for XML documents > to *also* be SGML documents. To do that, they *must* have at least > "<!DOCTYPE typename SYSTEM>" at their start. They must also have a DTD to be valid SGML documents. > Note that any *existing* SGML processor can consider this to be valid by > defining its algorithm for resolving the omitted SYSTEM identifier to be > "parse the document Please name any existing SGML processor that works this way today. If you have to change the code, you're not talking about an existing parser. A modified parser could just as easily insert a DOCTYPE line. LeeReceived on Monday, 28 October 1996 10:31:36 EST
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 10:03:36 EDT