Re: Version information

On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 00:12:40 +0200, Henrik Dvergsdal  
<> wrote:

> 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.

If we were to define an SGML serialization, then sure, but we're not  
(again, see our charter).

>> 2. You don't need a doctype in XML.
> No, you can refer to a schema instead, [...]

You don't need to refer to a schema either.

Simon Pieters

Received on Thursday, 12 April 2007 22:23:26 UTC