W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org > October 1996

Re: B.10 Empty elements?

From: Martin Bryan <mtbryan@sgml.u-net.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 07:43:22 +0100
To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <96Oct15.074322bst.38313(5)@u-net.net>
..  No matter how we explain it, the <e></e> looks redundant 
>for an EMPTY element 

and

>If empty elements were marked syntactically, e.g.
><@PGBRK>
>then there would be no problem.

The first solution cannot be used as input to a standard SGML tool, so would
require a specialised XML tool to edit the document. The second solution
could be handled by any SGML tool that allowed extension to the name
characacter definition. I would argue that this provides a strong case for
selecting the second solution. 
----
Martin Bryan, The SGML Centre, Churchdown, Glos. GL3 2PU, UK 
Phone/Fax: +44 1452 714029   WWW home page: http://www.u-net.com/~sgml/
Received on Tuesday, 15 October 1996 03:09:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:25:04 UTC