[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: "James Tauber" <jtauber@jtauber.com>
- To: "Frank Boumphrey" <bckman@ix.netcom.com>, "xml mailing list" <xml-dev@ic.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 22:28:27 +0800
>Aquick question
>
>is
><xdoc><xdoc>some text</xdoc></xdoc>
>
>i.e. a recursing root element, a legal XML document,
>
>>From my reading of section 2.1 it isn't but the MSXML parser lets it
stand,
>so I'm probabably wrong.
Yes, it's a legal (well-formed) XML document. I think the reason 2.1 might
have confused you is that you are taking "element" as if it were "element
type". Section 2.1 says there is only one *element* that is the root, not
that there is only one *element type*. The one *element* that is the root
can be of the same type as other elements in the document (as in your
example).
Hope this helps.
James
--
James Tauber / jtauber@jtauber.com / www.jtauber.com
Associate Researcher, Electronic Commerce Network
Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Western Australia
Full-day XML Tutorial @ WWW8 : http://www8.org/
Maintainer of : www.xmlinfo.com, www.xmlsoftware.com and www.schema.net
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)
|
