Re: SERIOUS concerns about implementation
I concur completely with Michael.
No-one has ever said that existing legacy SGML (or HTML) files will be
valid XML files. They won't.
The conversion is automatic and trivial.
The <!--* comment syntax *--> came from me, and is a sort of
transition syntax: you can use this in SGML today, as any SGML
parser will accept it as a comment that just happens to contain the stars.
If'when SGML is enhanced to allow different start and end comment delimiters,
this comment syntax lets you include -- in comments.
Also, yes, it looks familiar to C programmers, and there are a lot of us.
> On Thu, 20 Feb 1997 06:35:10 -0500 Peter Murray-Rust said:
> >If you install Panorama there is a directory called catalog, with about
> >35 files which are a mixture of popular *.dtd and *.ent.
> >EVERY SINGLE FILE WILL BREAK XML UNLESS THE SYNTAX IS CHANGED.
No, none of these files will break. They are all SGML files, and
are not for use with XML. I expect that a future Panorama may well
handle both XML and SGML...
> I suggest that any proposals to
> - start allowing comments in arbitrary SGML declarations
> - return to the use of -- -- com delimiters
> - remove the restrictions on content models which will make many
> existing DTDs break with XML parsers
> - restore the SDATA entity type
> need some further motivation before we reopen these questions.
I agree. All the changes were made for good reason.
XML is a subset of SGML, but that doesn't mean that a subset of existing
SGML files are XML files.
> Is there a reason to revisit the decisions?