Re: Version information

On 12. apr. 2007, at 23.41, Simon Pieters wrote:

> 1. It is a valid SGML doctype (FWIW).

Well, I don't have access to the SGML standard so I cannot check on  
this, but using a DOCTYPE declaration without reference to a Formal  
identifier/DTD is pretty useless and I think a standard like this  
should have a formal identifier.

> 2. You don't need a doctype in XML.

No, you can refer to a schema instead, but if you use one it should  
conform to the SGML standard.


Received on Thursday, 12 April 2007 22:13:05 UTC