[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com> wrote:
| > "Wayne Steele" <xmlmaster@hotmail.com> wrote:
|>| 3. It requires a non-xml syntax to be created (to represent link behavour
|>| and semantics, with is then stuffed into a Notation's Public ID)
|>
|> Demonizing DTDs is one thing, but to call declaration syntax "non-xml" is
|> nothing more than prejudice. If it were true, the XML *spec* wouldn't
|> have bothered with specifying syntax for declarations. I mean, really.
|
| From my reading, what he was calling non-XML was not DTD syntax but the
| "xlink: show=new actuate=onLoad" that gets stuffed into the notation pub
| ID,
Your reading is better than mine, and correct. I autoassociated "It uses
DTDs" with "non-xml syntax" in my reading. My apologies to Wayne.
However!
There is nothing syntactically non-xml about that string as a Public ID.
It has only minimum data characters. (I think I'm one of the few people
in the world - maybe the only one - who doesn't automatically expect to
see FPI syntax in XML public ids. I could claim this as an excuse for my
misreading, but I won't - I should have read more closely anyway.)
|
