Re: 1.3, Notation: SGML? Reference Concrete?

At 11:09 AM 1/31/97, Tim Bray wrote:
>1.3.a Should we assume that saying links are expressed using SGML elements
>and attributes, and describing them in SGML terms, is a satisfactorily
>complete syntax spec, thus avoiding a requirement for any BNF?

We don't need BNF, I agree, but we should use some variant of the
"architecture" approach.

>1.3.b If links are SGML elements, should require XML-style reference
>concrete syntax + quoted attribute values?  I.e. assert that
>all links would fit into XML docs?


No _more_ syntax is required, so no more should be forthcoming!

  -- David

I am not a number. I am an undefined character.
David Durand              dgd@cs.bu.edu  \  david@dynamicDiagrams.com
Boston University Computer Science        \  Sr. Analyst
http://www.cs.bu.edu/students/grads/dgd/   \  Dynamic Diagrams
--------------------------------------------\  http://dynamicDiagrams.com/
MAPA: mapping for the WWW                    \__________________________