Re: Clarification for 4.2.2

At 1:46 PM -0700 8/15/01, Jonathan Marsh wrote:
>Thanks for the comment; please accept our apologies for taking so long
>to resolve this issue.
>
>We agree that inclusion of a top-level element is underspecified, and
>will update the draft to indicate that a top-level include element can
>only be replaced by a combination of zero or more comment nodes, zero or
>more processing instructions, and zero or one element nodes.
>

zero or one element nodes? Wouldn't you want exactly one element node? Or am I missing something? 
-- 

+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer |
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+ 
|          The XML Bible, 2nd Edition (Hungry Minds, 2001)           |
|              http://www.ibiblio.org/xml/books/bible2/              |
|   http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0764547607/cafeaulaitA/   |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
|  Read Cafe au Lait for Java news:  http://www.cafeaulait.org/      | 
|  Read Cafe con Leche for XML news: http://www.ibiblio.org/xml/     |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+