Re: [xml-dev] Should we have a special tag for the "body" of a macro?

[Peter Flynn <peter@silmaril.ie>]

On 15/10/18 22:57, Victor Porton wrote:
> I am developing a specification of macroses in XML.
> 
> <prog:macro name="f">
>   <prog:arguments>
>     <prog:argument name="x"/>
>     <prog:argument name="y"/>
>   </prog:arguments>
>   <prog:value name="x"/> then <prog:value name="y"/>
> </prog:macro>
> 
> or
> 
> <prog:macro name="f">
>   <prog:arguments>
>     <prog:argument name="x"/>
>     <prog:argument name="y"/>
>   </prog:arguments>
>   <prog:body>
>     <prog:value name="x"/> then <prog:value name="y"/>
>   </prog:body>
> </prog:macro>

For a couple of decades I think the general answer has been "if you need
to ask the question, then yes, you need a container".¹

See http://xml.silmaril.ie/containment.html

> prog:arguments should be optional (as in the case of zero arguments), I
> think.

For sure.

///Peter
-- 
¹ Maler, E and el Andaloussi, J. Developing SGML DTDs: from text to
model to markup, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1996.
0-13-309881-8 (§ 6.2, p.187).