- From: <lee@sq.com>
- Date: Sat, 22 Mar 97 18:34:35 EST
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
Michael,
I think that having no predefined entities is best, too.
My only doubt is that i was hoping that an _extremely_ minimal
XML application would be one that didn't know how to understand the
DTD at all. Since the DTD is essentially an entirely different
language, for wrong but historical reasons :-), not handling a
DTD is a simplification.
But if most XML files contain entity definitions, they will have
either an internal subset or a minimal DTD, even if all the DTD
does is define amp and lt.
So most applications will have to parse DTDs.
How about this instead?
Say that the following fragment is considered to occur at the
end of the DTD for any XML file:
<!Entity amp CDATA "&38;">
<!Entity lt CDATA "&xx;"> (sorry, forgot the number)
A DTD that redefines these names may do so at peril of
confusing humans and also software that doesn't do the dtd thing.
Bt it would still be possible, and putting it at the _end_ of the
DTD means that any other definitions would override these.
(does the spec mention the SGML oddity that earlier definitions override
later ones?)
Lee
Received on Saturday, 22 March 1997 18:34:29 UTC