[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: revised restatement of the RE rules



Everyone seems to be ignoring Michael's immediately preceding posting, which
contains all that an XML user will need to know about RE handling, so I'll
repeat it here:

> RE is insignificant
>(i.e. not passed to any downstream application, not part of the
>XML grove plan) when it occurs in any of the following patterns:

>  start-tag nondata* RE
>  RE nondata* end-tag
>  RS nondata+ RE

>where non-data is defined this way:

>  nondata ::= comment declaration
>             | processing instruction
>             | character reference
>             | entity reference
>             | entity-end
>             | marked section declaration
>             | included subelement
>             | short reference
>             | shortref use declaration
>             | link set use declaration

For the record, both James Clark and myself agree with this statement, which is
both concise and formal.

Michael then went on to provide some examples:

>The element Q contains no REs in any of the following cases:

>  <q>
>  Listen to my heart beat.
>  </q>

>This is the simple case:  RE adjacent to a start-tag or end-tag.

>  <q>
>  <!-- sound track is silent -->
>  Listen to my heart beat <!-- --
>  ><?DIRECTOR begin: audio>
>  and beat and beat and beat.
>  </q>

>Here rule (a) takes care of line 1, rule (c) of line 2, the comment of
>line 3, rule (c) again of line 4, and rule (b) of line 5.

>  <q><!-- sound track is silent -->
>  Listen to my heart beat.
>  </q>

>This is the one case I can think of where the first RE is not
>actually adjacent to the start-tag.

>-C. M. Sperberg-McQueen

--
Charles F. Goldfarb * Information Management Consulting * +1(408)867-5553
           13075 Paramount Drive * Saratoga CA 95070 * USA
  International Standards Editor * ISO 8879 SGML * ISO/IEC 10744 HyTime
 Prentice-Hall Series Editor * CFG Series on Open Information Management
--


References: