GI vs. Element Type (Was: RE: JUMBO)

Peter Murray-Rust Peter at
Mon Mar 24 20:49:40 GMT 1997

These are extremely valuable contributions.  I also had another mail which
confirmed that there were subtly different (the GI is the _name_ of an element
type, c.f. Lewis Carroll).

It would be extremely useful for us to collect the required terminology for
XML.  If someone does it, I'll put it in XML using ISO 12620 terminology
(I have already written the DTD and rendering in JUMBO/CML, see
for examples, and I simply need the content.)

Much of the definitions are already in electronic form from - I asked earlier
:-), but the important thing is to know which ones are required for XML.  It 
could be a much smaller subset.  

Good terminology helps the creation of programs and documents, and makes it much
easier for newcomers.  For example, there is a constant confusion between
tags, GIs and elements.  A pictorial diagram would be very useful here.
I think it's very useful if the components of an API (e.g. Lark uses
Element, Entity, etc. are generally agreed to follow the terminology - I am
sure that Tim has been careful here).

In message <01BC3860.3A99B8E0 at> Russ Chamberlain writes:
> Hello XMLers,
> > lee at wrote:
> >> > Peter Murray-Rust wrote:
> >> I still don't know if there is a difference between 'GI' and 
> >> 'Element type', for example.
> >
> >In XML they are the same, as far as I can tell.
> >
> Here's the verbatim definitions from my ISO 8879 spec:
>     4.114 element type: A class of elements having similar
>     characteristics; for example, paragraph, chapter, abstract, > footnote,
>     or bibliography.

H'm.  So there can be a hierarchy of element types in an SGML document.


Peter Murray-Rust, domestic net connection
Virtual School of Molecular Sciences

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers
Archived as:
To unsubscribe, send to majordomo at the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (rzepa at

More information about the Xml-dev mailing list