W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > April to June 2000

RE: NMTOKEN elements?

From: Biron,Paul V <Paul.V.Biron@kp.org>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 07:59:19 -0700
Message-Id: <376E771642C1D2118DC300805FEAAF4386DC7E@pars-exch-1.ca.kp.org>
To: "DuCharme, Robert" <Robert.DuCharme@moodys.com>
Cc: "'www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org'" <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:	petsa@us.ibm.com [SMTP:petsa@us.ibm.com]
> Sent:	Friday, June 23, 2000 7:37 AM
> To:	DuCharme, Robert
> Cc:	'www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org'
> Subject:	Re: NMTOKEN elements?
> 
> In section 3.3.4,  where NMTOKEN is defined, the Datatypes spec says
> "For compatibility (see Terminolgy (1.4)) NMTOKEN should be used only
> in attributes."  If you go to 1.4, it defines "compatibility" as
> compatibilty
> with the XML 1.0 spec.
> 
> This means that you are free to use NMTOKEN as an element value but
> your instance documents will not conform to the XML 1.0 spec.
> 
Just a bit of clarification here.  Your instance document will still
"conform" to the XML 1.0 spec, in the sense that it is still a well-formed
document.  The point of the "for compatibility" clause is that if you define
the text content of an element to be of type NMTOKEN (or ID, IDREF, etc.)
then there will not be a DTD equivalent for your schema (i.e., it will not
be possible to translate your schema into a DTD which validates the same
instances).

pvb
Received on Thursday, 29 June 2000 11:02:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:08:47 UTC