Yet another validity question
cowan at locke.ccil.org
Fri Apr 23 15:45:17 BST 1999
Liam R. E. Quin wrote:
> One reason it is there is to allow "elephants", but exclusions were
> later removed from XML:
> <!ELEMENT HOLDER - O (ELEPHANT*) -ELEPHANT>
> in which HOLDER must now be empty but can have a missing end tag.
I suppose you mean "can have an explicit end tag", no? After all,
ordinary EMPTY elements don't have end tags.
John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan at ccil.org
You tollerday donsk? N. You tolkatiff scowegian? Nn.
You spigotty anglease? Nnn. You phonio saxo? Nnnn.
Clear all so! 'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)
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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
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