- From: Peter Murray-Rust <Peter@ursus.demon.co.uk>
- Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 08:58:30 GMT
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
In message <libSDtMail.9705201713.542.altheim@mehitabel> altheim writes:
> > > It isn't essential to have the ':', but it's much less elegant without it.
> >
> > You can have it. You have to declare it. XML as with SGML doesn't
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^???^^^^^^^^^^^^
I don't think I *can* have it unless the ERB says so (productions [3]-[6]).
How would I declare it?
> > have to enforce it. It is a neat idea.
>
> I can't remember who mentioned it initially, but I kinda prefer two
> colons "::" to one ":", since it mirrors FPIs' namespace delimiter.
I'm happy to have two (C++-like). James Clark rightly pointed out
that my SGML was simplistic, but it can still be done - and
the result is prettier:
<!DOCTYPE CML [
<!ENTITY % fq "CML::">
<!ENTITY % mol "%fq;MOL">
<!ENTITY % atom "%fq;ATOM">
<!ELEMENT CML (%mol;)*>
<!ELEMENT %mol; (%atom;)*>
<!ELEMENT %atom; (#PCDATA)>
]>
<CML>
<CML::MOL>
...
</CML::MOL>
</CML>
> Also, it's more unique (and hence explicit) than a single colon.
> Either way, agreed: a neat idea.
>
> Murray
>
P.
--
Peter Murray-Rust, domestic net connection
Virtual School of Molecular Sciences
http://www.vsms.nottingham.ac.uk/
Received on Wednesday, 21 May 1997 04:12:32 UTC