- From: Terry Allen <tallen@fsc.fujitsu.com>
- Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 07:35:11 -0800 (PST)
- To: U35395@UICVM.UIC.EDU, w3c-sgml-wg@www10.w3.org
Michael writes:
[21] Comment := "<!--*"{Misc}*{HS}"-->"
[21] Comment := "<!--*"({NHS}|("-"{SH}*{NHS})|({SH}+{NHS}))*{HS}"-->"
[21] Comment :=
"<!--*"({NHS}|("-"("*""-"?)*{NHS})|(("*""-"?)+{NHS}))*{HS}"-->"
[21] Comment :=
"<!--*"([^-*]|("-"("*""-"?)*[^-*])|(("*""-"?)+[^-*]))*{HS}"-->"
[21] Comment :=
"<!--*"([^-*]|("-"("*""-"?)*[^-*])|(("*""-"?)+[^-*]))*("*"|"-*")+"-->"
I'm sure the SERB had good reasons for the new comment syntax,
but it certainly isn't simple and some of us will have to explain
it to skeptics. Could we have a very short statement of what
was wrong with SGML comment syntax that the XML comment syntax
fixes, and why the XML solution was chosen?
Regards,
Terry Allen Fujitsu Software Corp. tallen@fsc.fujitsu.com
"In going on with these experiments, how many pretty systems do we build,
which we soon find outselves obliged to destroy?" - Benjamin Franklin
A Davenport Group Sponsor: http://www.ora.com/davenport/index.html
Received on Wednesday, 29 January 1997 10:35:42 UTC