Re: B.10 Empty elements?
A survey of the options:
<e></e> - easy to understand. But of course then we can't retain the
EMPTY 8879 declaration in XML, thus making XML<->SGML round-tripping
difficult. Also I agree that it looks like a place where data ought
to be put. Also, I think that XML ought to be able to deal with
the following common formulation: <IMG SRC="x.gif">; call this
<@e> and <e/ - Both of these are easy to understand, allow reasonable SGML
interoperability, but make HTML interoperability impossible.
<e> - requires annoying extra markup declarations. On the other hand,
allows full SGML and HTML interoperability. Also, it is A Good Thing
to make people start thinking about markup declarations.
I think that SGML and HTML interoperability are worth a whole lot of elegance
and cleverness. So it's <e> for me.
Cheers, Tim Bray
email@example.com http://www.textuality.com/ +1-604-488-1167