Content markups, EBNF & DTD

Hi,

The EBNF ( http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-MathML/appendixE.html ) definition of
MathML content markups seems to be far more detailed and precise than the
DTD ( http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-MathML/appendixA.html ). What do you think of
this ? Is it normal ?

For example for the definition of "apply"
*  In the DTD:
<!ATTLIST apply   %att-globalatts;     >
... and ...
<!ENTITY % Content "%ctoken; | %cspecial;  | %cother;  | %csemantics;
                    |%cconstructor; | %cquantifier;
                    |%cop1ary; |%cop2ary; |%copnary; |%copmisc;
                    |%crel2ary; |%crelnary;" >

<!ENTITY % ContentExpression   "(%Content; | %PresInCont;)* "     >

<!ELEMENT apply      (%ContentExpression;)   >

* In the EBNF grammar:
apply           ::= _sg(apply) _applybody _eg(apply)
_applybody      ::= ( _unaryop _mmlarg  )
                                | (_binaryop _mmlarg _mmlarg)
                                | (_naryop _mmlarg*)
                                | (_naryop bvar* condition _mmlarg)
                                | (_ispop  bvar? _ispdomain? _mmlarg)
                                | (_diffop bvar* _mmlarg)
                                | (log logbase? _mmlarg)
                                | (moment degree? _mmlarg*)
                                | (root degree? _mmlarg)
                                | (limit bvar* lowlimit? condition? _mmlarg)
                                | (_logicopquant bvar+ condition? (reln |
apply))

What's the best newsgroup to post MathML related questions (with or without
Mozilla) ?

Thanks for your help,
Gerald.

________________________________
Gérald QUINTANA
  gerald.quintana@ecl2000.ec-lyon.fr
  http://www.multimania.com/gquintana