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

Re: B.10 Empty elements?

From: Gavin Nicol <gtn@ebt.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 16:44:39 -0400
Message-Id: <199610182044.QAA13643@nathaniel.ebt>
To: aray@nmds.com
CC: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
>Indeed. The SGML compatibility rule [*] is the real problem, in that
>the (core) concrete syntax (actually, even the abstract syntax) is
>*lexically* inadequate. The issue has always been one of
>tokenization. The denotation of an empty element is indistinguishable
>from the start tag of an element with content: in SGML systems the
>DTD has always been present to resolve  the ambiguity on what from a
>lexical point of view are essentially "semantic" grounds. Without a
>DTD, the alternatives are restricted to either disallowing empty
>elements altogether or disambiguating them *lexically*. 

Yes. This is the conflusion of syntax and semantics that I refer to:
SGML has too many things in the parser that are really interpreted
based on a semantic decision.
Received on Friday, 18 October 1996 16:46:22 UTC

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