- From: W. Eliot Kimber <drmacro@drmacro.com>
- Date: Sat, 02 Nov 1996 12:58:41 -0900
- To: "Eve L. Maler" <elm@arbortext.com>, w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
- Cc: elm@arbortext.com
At 01:41 PM 11/2/96 -0500, Eve L. Maler wrote: >In XML, we've tossed out OMITTAG. However, there's a question about >whether we allow the "omitted tag minimization" parameter in XML >element declarations. > >I feel we should, so that existing DTDs that provide these specifications >don't need to be maintained in two separate versions, one for SGML and >one for XML. I see no harm in allowing them. In private conversation, >Tim has said that we shouldn't, because it requires more cruft in the >XML spec. I hadn't thought about it before, but it seems easier to add a little more to the element declaration production (and corresponding pattern matching regexps) than to require changing 99% of existing declarations to work with XML. It's only two additional two-character optional OR groups: ([O\-], S*, [0\-])? Cheers, E. -- W. Eliot Kimber (drmacro@drmacro.com) Senior SGML Consulting Engineer, Highland Consulting 2200 North Lamar Street, Suite 230, Dallas, Texas 75202 +1-214-953-0004 +1-214-953-3152 fax http://www.isogen.com (work) http://www.drmacro.com (home) "Rats in the morning, rats in the afternoon...if they don't go away, I'll be re-educated soon..." --Austin Lounge Lizards, "1984 Blues"
Received on Saturday, 2 November 1996 13:59:42 UTC