W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org > February 1997

Re: 1.3, Notation: SGML? Reference Concrete?

From: David G. Durand <dgd@cs.bu.edu>
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 15:13:23 -0500
Message-Id: <v0213050eaf1a9b59fd12@[205.181.197.81]>
To: w3c-sgml-wg@www10.w3.org
At 11:09 AM 1/31/97, Tim Bray wrote:
>1.3.a Should we assume that saying links are expressed using SGML elements
>and attributes, and describing them in SGML terms, is a satisfactorily
>complete syntax spec, thus avoiding a requirement for any BNF?

We don't need BNF, I agree, but we should use some variant of the
"architecture" approach.

>1.3.b If links are SGML elements, should require XML-style reference
>concrete syntax + quoted attribute values?  I.e. assert that
>all links would fit into XML docs?

YES! YES!

No _more_ syntax is required, so no more should be forthcoming!

  -- David

I am not a number. I am an undefined character.
_________________________________________
David Durand              dgd@cs.bu.edu  \  david@dynamicDiagrams.com
Boston University Computer Science        \  Sr. Analyst
http://www.cs.bu.edu/students/grads/dgd/   \  Dynamic Diagrams
--------------------------------------------\  http://dynamicDiagrams.com/
MAPA: mapping for the WWW                    \__________________________
Received on Sunday, 2 February 1997 15:13:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:25:07 UTC