empty tags and the XMl 1.0 spec

[James Tauber]

>"Empty-element tags may be used for any element which has no content,
>whether or not it is declared using the keyword EMPTY. For
>interoperability, the empty-element tag must be used, and can only be
>used, for elements which are declared EMPTY."
>
>1. The "can only be used" part of the second sentence seems to
>contradict the the first sentence.
>
>2. "the empty-element tag must be used...for elements which are declared
>EMPTY" seems to contradict the assertiona that <NAME></NAME> and <NAME/>
>are the same thing.
>
>Is there any way out of this conundrum?


Yes. The term "for interoperability" is means it's not a requirement for
well-formed XML, but *if* you want to maintain interoperability with
pre-WebSGML SGML processors, then you should do it.

In other words, <NAME></NAME> is equivalent to <NAME/> *UNLESS* you want to
maintain interoperability with older SGML systems in which case you should
only use <NAME/> for elements declared EMPTY and not <NAME></NAME>.

Hope this helps.

James
--
James Tauber / jtauber at jtauber.com / www.jtauber.com
Associate Researcher, Electronic Commerce Network
Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Western Australia

Full-day XML Tutorial @ WWW8 : http://www8.org/

Maintainer of : www.xmlinfo.com,  www.xmlsoftware.com and www.schema.net



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;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)