Re: Comments: through clause 3

[Lee Quin]
> [Chris Maden]
> > Clause 3.5 in 0.01/W3C (now missing):
> > 
> > Carried from 0.01.  The DTD summary is no longer needed for empty
> > elements, and is moot for mixed vs. element content distinction,
> > but would be a VERY useful way to override the defaulted entities
> > without requiring DTD parsing.
> You can't override the default entities (believe it or not -- it's a
> design bug).  Apart from that nonsense, it would be better to allow
> entity declarations in a document type subset, perhaps?

The only reason I could see for not allowing the entity overrides is
that it requires DTD parsing, and so a DTDless parse would come up
different from a DTD parse, and that's bad.  But if there's a way to
tell DTDless systems which entities have been overridden, even without
the actual definitions, then it's not such a problem.

<!ENTITY crism PUBLIC "-//EBT//NONSGML Christopher R. Maden//EN" SYSTEM
"<URL>http://www.ebt.com <TEL>+1.401.421.9550 <FAX>+1.401.521.2030
<USMAIL>One Richmond Square, Providence, RI 02906 USA" NDATA SGML.Geek>