Re: RS/RE, again (sorry)
> [Chris Maden:]
> | 3) A dichotomy between "DTD-ful" and DTD-less parsing will make any
> | sibling-based relationship difficult at best; this will affect some
> | TEI or HyQ based hyperlinks, as well as sibling-based stylistic
> | decisions.
> Sorry to be so slow here, but what's the connection with sibling
> relationships? My idea of a well-formed XML document is one for
> which there is just one possible tree structure; what's different
> about sibling relationships if a DTD is provided?
TEI and, I believe, HyQ, use sibling relationships for addressing;
e.g., start at the element whose SGML ID is "foo" and traverse three
nodes to the right.
If DTD-less parsing creates spurious CDATA nodes, then the target of
an address can be different from that for a DTD-ful parse.
<!NOTATION SGML.Geek PUBLIC "-//GCA//NOTATION SGML Geek//EN">
<!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>