[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>> Two only slightly related questions:
>>
>> 1. Why did XML keep the requirement for deterministic models?
>If I'm not mistaken, it was so that every valid XML document
>would also be a valid SGML document (given a suitable SGML
>declaration, that is).
>Since XML doesn't have start-tag omission, deterministic
>content models aren't _strictly_ necessary. (Actually,
>they're not strictly necessary for SGML either, you'd just
>need to rephrase the way start-tag inference is specified
>in the Standard.)
And the cost of getting rid of that restriction would be
(legacy software costs aside)?
>(P.S. *Many* thanks for starting an actual XML-related thread!)
It's out of character, I know, but occasionally I find cause to work.
len
|
