- From: Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 07:49:21 +0000
- To: liam@w3.org
- Cc: www-xsl-fo@w3.org
On 8 December 2010 21:07, Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org> wrote: > The notation used is described in 6.2, "Formatting Object Content", > http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xsl11-20061205/#d0e6532 there is no explanation of PCDATA in 6.2 Liam? Only what substitutions may be made. > > Although DTDs are less commonly used these days, they're still very > much part of XML of course. Do you think that it'd be clearer if we > used some other notation for 2.0? I'm wondering if that is clear, or makes an assumption about DTD understanding? The content models used do stand for use in relax NG, just that they aren't complete? See my bugzilla entreis. the use of %xxx; notation is perhaps becoming an oddity as DTDs fall out of use. Perhaps xInclude notation, providing the xIclude expansion in the XML version of the rec, yet not expanding them in the (to be printed) rec? That way they could be verified as being 'as intended'. regards -- Dave Pawson XSLT XSL-FO FAQ. Docbook FAQ. http://www.dpawson.co.uk
Received on Thursday, 9 December 2010 07:49:53 UTC