[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: those predeclared entity refs



In message <9703140217.AA28707@sqrex.sq.com> lee@sq.com writes:
[...hairy nested entity example deleted...]
> 
> This example may appear very obscure.  I could give a larger example
> in which it would no longer be obscure, as can Eliot and Michael
> and Lou and others: IBMIDDOC, TEI, Davenport all use nested parameter
> entity deifintions.

This concerns me because the implementers on xml-dev have been struggling
with the precise management of entities.  I suspect that without further 
guidance, they might come up with different implementations of nested
entities (and other similar problems).  
I'd like the WG/ERB to try to come up with some way of
expressing their views in the XML-spec - my feeling is that either it has 
to be much simpler than SGML or else exactly track what SGML requires (or at 
least how SGMLS interprets it).  People will naturally look to SGML if they
can't get it from the XML spec.

	P.

-- 
Peter Murray-Rust, domestic net connection
Virtual School of Molecular Sciences
http://www.vsms.nottingham.ac.uk/