Re: C.4 Undeclared entities?
On Sun, 27 Oct 1996 20:40:12 -0800, Tim Bray <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Charles' proposal boils down to:
> A well-formed XML document must include a <!DOCTYPE
>So, on balance, I would at the moment vote against requiring <!DOCTYPE
>as a condition of well-formedness. Even if it were desirable, it would
>be widely ignored, and I think that rules that aren't going to be
>obeyed shouldn't be made.
I don't think I was as clear as I should have been. We seem to agree that only
"valid" XML and "well-formed" XML are of interest. (Documents that are neither
are broken.) We also agree that "valid" XML is just like valid SGML, with the
same kind of DOCTYPE declaration.
I am *not* proposing that there be an explicit "DTD" for merely "well-formed"
XML. I am proposing, as Eliot has pointed out, that there is a legitimate 8879
DOCTYPE declaration for the case where there is no explicit DTD, viz:
<!DOCTYPE DocumentTypeName SYSTEM>
If XML uses this to introduce a well-formed DTD-less document, it will satisfy
SGML conformance as well. Therefore, there is no reason to break SGML
conformance for well-formed DTD-less XML documents.
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