jjaakkol at cs.Helsinki.FI
Thu Feb 12 15:28:53 GMT 1998
On Thu, 12 Feb 1998, David Megginson wrote:
> In other words, XML processors may (and should) treat
> as equivalent, but document authors might want to make the distinction
> so that pre-WebSGML SGML parsers can handle their documents.
Ah. Pardon me my ignorance. Different syntax for empty elements
in XML or SGML was a nuisance anyway, so this seems to be a one more thing
> SAX as it currently stands is not designed to preserve most lexical
> information; in the future, we may devise a SAX level-2 to return this
> information, but since most applications that need it will probably
> use a DOM anyway, the demand may not be strong enough.
If i understood this correctly, SAX is also not designed for
interoperatibility. If you want to generate pre-WebSGML from
XML using SAX (and accept that lexical information is not preserved), you
still would need the ability to detect empty declared elements.
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)
More information about the Xml-dev