Re: XML and required DTDs

> I'll admit to not caring very much for the tagged pseudo elements
> proposal for dealing with mixed content when I saw the first
> un-minimized examples.  This changed somewhat when I saw the shortref
> examples.  I'm still not particularly happy with the added markup
> burden, but now think it may be worth the trade-off of remaining ESIS
> compatible and SGML compatible.

In a pinch, I could live with your proposal, but I need to understand the 
problem more. Can't we restrict mixed comment to "|" and restrict the 
placement of PIs and comments to make the RS/RE problem go away? 
Making incompatible with the output of most SGML producers, with 100% of all
existing HTML documents and just-plain-different seems like a sledgehammer
to slay a slug.

We may not achieve 100% backwards compatibility with valid HTML or with the
output of existing SGML tools, but surely we shouldn't give up on those goals 
so early in the game in order to work around the handling of RS/RE.

Or is this slug harder to slay than I had supposed?

 Paul Prescod