Principles for SGML Compatibility

These may already have been articulated, but in responding to Michael's
recent notes, I realized that I was applying the following rules for
determining when something was or was not acceptible WRT to SGML
compatability. I wanted to state them here to make sure these are in line
with the official position and/or the majority view:

1. Processing of XML documents as SGML may require either creation of a DTD or
   transformation from XML-specific declarations to the equivalent SGML 

2. Processing of XML documents as SGML must *never* require transformation
   of the document instance. In other words, XML instances must be processible
   as SGML as us once an appropriate DTD has been provided.

3. That while we are accepting the possibility of a transformation of an
   XML declaration set to an SGML declaration set, we should endeavor to
   limit the complexity of that transformation as much as possible, with the
   ideal that XML declarations are identical to SGML declarations (but may
   be a subset of the declarations required or allowed by SGML).

4. Processing of XML documents as SGML may require any or all of the optional 
   SGML features omittag, shorttag, and shortref (I'm assuming that datatag is
   not useful).


W. Eliot Kimber (kimber@passage.com) 
Senior SGML Consultant and HyTime Specialist
Passage Systems, Inc., (512)339-1400
10596 N. Tantau Ave., Cupertino, CA 95014-3535 (408) 366-0300, (408)
366-0320 (fax)
2608 Pinewood Terrace, Austin, TX 78757 (512) 339-1400 (fone/fax)
http://www.passage.com (work) http://www.drmacro.com (home)
"If I never had existed, would you still remember me?..."
                                   --Austin Lounge Lizards, "1984 Blues"