> <!ENTITY % begin '<!ENTITY % value "str'>
> <!ENTITY % end 'ing">'>
> <!ENTITY % all '%begin;%end;'>
> %all;
>
> This seems valid to me (as well as all other possible constructions of the
> 'all' entity that come from recursively expanding PEs). Do others agree?
If you interpret the Proper Declaration/PE Nesting validity constraint as
applying only to PEReferences outside entity value literals, then what you
have is ok, but %begin;%end; instead of %all; would be invalid. Otherwise,
not. No doubt someone here knows what was _meant_.
Bob Foster
