- From: Martin Bryan <mtbryan@sgml.u-net.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 21:33:22 +0100
- To: <w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org>
Please ignore that rubbish I just posted: I realised what was wrong with Rick's suggestion! >At 03:51 12/6/97 +1000, Rick Jelliffe wrote: ><!DOCTYPE x SYSTEM "x.dtd" > SEEALSO PUBLIC "IDN//w3.org//NOTATION xml-lang//EN" > PUBLIC "IDN//w3.org//NOTATION xml-link//EN" > PUBLIC "IDN//w3.org//NOTATION xml-style//EN" > PUBLIC "IDN//sgmlopen.org/NOTATION CALS table model//EN" []> This serves no purpose as the notations need to be tied to particular elements or entities in the file, and this can only be done if they have names, i.e. if they are declared as named notations in the internal/external subset. >Thus, the DOCTYPE declaration can become more like a full DTD. In the TC, the SEEALSO >(additional requirements) parameter is part of the SGML declaration. I think this is wrong, No it isn't! The point is that the public identifiers associated with SEEALSO in the SGML declaration should not have a public text class of NOTATION, it should be DTD, ELEMENT or the new AF. What SEEALSO is supposed to tell you is what Architectural Form sets, or meta-DTD, the document conforms to, not what notation it is coded in. >and it would be more correct to put it in the DOCTYPE declaration, as in the example above. I must disagree (now I've had a coffee to waken me up:-)) ---- Martin Bryan, The SGML Centre, Churchdown, Glos. GL3 2PU, UK Phone/Fax: +44 1452 714029 WWW home page: http://www.sgml.u-net.com/
Received on Wednesday, 11 June 1997 16:34:31 UTC