At 7:35 PM 3/27/97, Peter Flynn wrote: >At 12:00 21/03/97 +0000, Henry S. Thompson wrote: >>unsatisfactory. '[P]arsed character data' is misleading, since by the >>syntax PCData cannot contain references! > >I've been campaigning for years for the phrase "parsable character data", >ie char data which it makes sense to parse (because it may contain markup) >as opposed to CDATA which there is no point in parsing because it can't. But there is no markup remaining in PCDATA--it's data that remains after the parsing process. I'd argue more that "CDATA" is misleading. One must still scan/"parse" for the terminating delimiter; there's just a much smaller choice. And then there's CDATA attributes.... Dave Peterson SGMLWorks! davep@acm.orgReceived on Friday, 4 April 1997 13:26:56 EST
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 10:04:23 EDT