- From: Paul Grosso <paul@arbortext.com>
- Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 12:08:20 -0500
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
At 16:30 1997 05 22 GMT, Christopher R. Maden wrote: >I think that the namespaces can be accomplished with one change to the >assumed XML as SGML declaration and an application convention. > ><!DOCTYPE mymess [ ><!ELEMENT mymess (html::p | faq::q | faq::a)*> ><!ELEMENT html::p (#PCDATA | html::a | tei::xref)*> ><!ELEMENT faq::q (#PCDATA | html::a | tei::xref)*> ><!ELEMENT faq::a (#PCDATA | html::a | tei::xref)*> ><!ELEMENT html::a (#PCDATA)> ><!ELEMENT tei::xref (#PCDATA)> >]> But why would the mymess DTD want to have an element declaration for, say, HTML's p element and how does such a declaration interact with the HTML's declaration? I would think that html:p (I prefer one colon) would have--at least by initial default--the content model from the HTML DTD. In fact, I expect a given instance of an html:p very likely came from an existing HTML document and may well have other elements from the HTML DTD embedded in it. If you have a declaration for html:p at all in mymess, I would expect it would be to allow html:p to contain elements--from the tei, faq, and mymess DTDs--in addition to those the HTML DTD already allows. I think I understand the multiple-namespaces-in-an-instance idea (though with lots of outstanding questions remaining), but I don't understand your "combined DTD" idea. Can you elaborate on what requirements it addresses and how it's supposed to work given some of my questions above? paul
Received on Thursday, 22 May 1997 13:12:07 UTC