Re: quantity sets and capacity sets
On Tue, 10 Sep 1996 04:05:43 -0400 Martin Bryan said:
>Eliminating the values would be much more flexible and very desirable,
>but you must be aware of one very important thing - by eliminating the
>current limitations we would AUTOMATICALLY be abandoning the use of
>SGML's reference concrete syntax. Questionnaire 1, on 0.2, points out
Is this a problem? If so, what? If not, why are you raising it?
>that all but one of the proposals we are considering are based on the
>SGML reference concrete syntax. The reference concrete syntax points,
Sorry, my slip. The note to item 0.2 may be misleading, since while all
the schemes mentioned are based on the reference concrete syntax, four
of the eight propose to ignore quantities and capacities. They do not
propose an alternate set (unless memory fails me); they simply propose
to ignore their values. Like the other four, therefore, they need no
concept of a difference between concrete and abstract syntax.
We are in any case not limited *at all* to the proposals summarized
in document DD-1996-0002; they may be regarded as straw proposals,
with the subtle difference that unlike a typical 'straw proposal' they
already exist independently of this group.
-C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
ACH / ACL / ALLC Text Encoding Initiative
University of Illinois at Chicago