Re: revised restatement of the RE rules
> Since we're having such difficulty with RS/RE, I propose declaring that they do
> not exist. If XML doesn't specify records, then there are no special rules to
> deal with their starting and ending points - end of problem. RS and RE are
> anachronisms and are not necessary to specify a markup language.
> What are the errors/problems with this approach? I recognize that 8879
> compatibility may be lost but what else is wrong? I'm looking for substantive
> technical issues with David Durand's "one record proposal".
Okay, Let's say I'm Jane WebMeister.
Does the "one record proposal" mean that this:
Is going to generate a parse tree with many newlines in it, which will
probably choke a parser that _does_ use a DTD, because <TABLE> is element
If so, I far prefer the quoted-delimeter proposal that removes the RS/RE
without sacrificing the author's ability to reorganize their XML source