- From: Michael Sperberg-McQueen <U35395@UICVM.CC.UIC.EDU>
- Date: Fri, 20 Sep 96 10:53:46 CDT
- To: Liam Quin <lee@sq.com>, W3C SGML Working Group <w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org>
On Thu, 19 Sep 1996 23:23:03 -0400 Liam Quin said:
> <p>Listen to my heart beat.
> <?DIRECTOR: audio on>
> And beat and beat and beat.</p>
>
>If the required form of this in XML were either
>
><p>Listen to my heart beat.<?DIRECTOR: audio on>
>And beat and beat and beat.</p>
>
>or
>
><p>Listen to my heart beat.
><?DIRECTOR: audio on>And beat and beat and beat.</p>
>
>then both SGML and XML would parse the document in the same way, no?
Or even
<p>Listen to my heart beat.
<?DIRECTOR: audio on
>And beat and beat and beat.</p>
I find it just as hard to explain to users why some newlines disappear
as some people seem to find it hard to explain that a newline in
character data is character data. Actually, a lot harder, since to
this day I wouldn't claim to be able to tell accurately whether a
newline is actually ignored or not, in any case except the simple one
(newline immediately after start-tag or immediately before end-tag),
without running a test through SP or sgmls first. Which means I *can't*
explain it, 'cause I don't understand it.
Can someone actually explain the RE rules here, in terms *not* those
used in the relevant clause of 8879? (If I understood it in those
terms I wouldn't have this problem.)
Michael Sperberg-McQueen
Received on Friday, 20 September 1996 11:59:03 UTC