Re: XML, HTML, SGML, life, the universe, and everything

At 01:53 AM 11/13/96 CST, streich@austin.sar.slb.com wrote:
>> There is an alternative even for this point: don't support name token values
>> (enums) at all in XML 1.0. Then you are 100% conforming and you don't have to
>> explain the indefensible. Enums can be added as a feature in 2.0 when the
>> constraint is removed for SGML97.
>I understand that it can be difficult to explain why you can't have
>duplicate enumerated values, but I fail to understand how this one,
>relatively small issue is worth breaking SGML conformance.

I strongly agree. SGML is broken in this regard, and will be fixed soon. XML
2.0 can incorporate the fix. As Bob mentions, vendors will probably not
implement this restriction, so those that do not care about SGML
compatibility will probably never notice it. Those that do care will be glad
that validating XML parsers will not accept invalid SGML documents. This
restriction does not have to be with us forever -- only until SGML is fixed.

 Paul Prescod
Boycott Shell Oil worldwide!  http://www.web.apc.org/embargo/shell.htm    

"Shell is here on trial and it is as well that it is represented by counsel
said to be holding a watching brief."..."The ecological war that the Company
has waged in the Delta will be called to question sooner than later." -Ken
Saro-Wiwa to the tribunal that later executed him.