a simpler document type definition language?
Jurg.Wullschleger at mb.luth.se
Tue Dec 14 08:31:54 GMT 1999
> > the simplest form i can think of would look something like this:
> > in DTD syntax)
> > there are only 4 types of elements:
> > - empty elements
> > <!ELEMENT name1 EMTPY >
> > - elements that contain data
> > <!ELEMENT name2 (#PCDATA) >
> > - list elements
> > <!ELEMENT name3 (name1|name2|name3|name4)* >
> > - structural elements of a fixed length
> > <!ELEMENT name4 ((name1|name2),name3,name4,(name5|name6|name7)) >
> I would go even simpler than that. Don't allow nested brackets, #4 could
> represented like this:
> <!ELEMENT name4 (nameA,name3,name4,nameB)>
> <!ELEMENT nameA (name1|name2)>
> <!ELEMENT nameB (name5|name6|name7)>
yes, that's maybe better.
i was affraid of defining it this way, because there are a lot of
elements needed. but these elements help a lot in a better
structuring, so it's maybe good to be forced to use them.
for example, it also solves the problem the "running text pattern"
but in a more natural way, i think.
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 unsubscribe, 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