W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > February 2000

Re: URL better than FPI

From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 15:42:18 GMT
Message-Id: <200002211542.PAA21126@nag.co.uk>
To: www-html@w3.org

Russell O'Connor wrote

> I thought every valid & well-formed XML document was a valid SGML
> document?

An XML document is one that meets the conditions laid down in the
XML Recommendation.

The XML Rec says in the introduction (1.1) that it was a _goal_ of
designing XML that it be compatible with SGML.

But that does not mean that that goal was necessarily achieved.

The same section (page 1 of the recommendation) explictly lists the
external references that are needed to have `all necessary information'
about XML, and the SGML spec is _not_ one of them.

<p>This specification, together with associated standards (Unicode and
ISO/IEC 10646 for characters, Internet RFC 1766 for language
identification tags, ISO 639 for language name codes, and ISO 3166 for
country name codes), provides all the information necessary to
understand XML Version &XML.version; and construct computer programs to
process it.</p>

So, from that list, where do I find any rules about naming schemes for
public identifiers?

It seems to me the only relevant data is:

<prod id="NT-PubidLiteral"><lhs>PubidLiteral</lhs>....

Received on Monday, 21 February 2000 10:46:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:53 UTC