Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: Jani Jaakkola <jjaakkol@cs.Helsinki.FI>
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 17:24:41 +0200 (EET)
On Thu, 12 Feb 1998, David Megginson wrote:
> In other words, XML processors may (and should) treat
> as equivalent, but document authors might want to make the distinction
> so that pre-WebSGML SGML parsers can handle their documents.
Ah. Pardon me my ignorance. Different syntax for empty elements
in XML or SGML was a nuisance anyway, so this seems to be a one more thing
> SAX as it currently stands is not designed to preserve most lexical
> information; in the future, we may devise a SAX level-2 to return this
> information, but since most applications that need it will probably
> use a DOM anyway, the demand may not be strong enough.
If i understood this correctly, SAX is also not designed for
interoperatibility. If you want to generate pre-WebSGML from
XML using SAX (and accept that lexical information is not preserved), you
still would need the ability to detect empty declared elements.
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:email@example.com
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org)