About templates

[Don Park]

>> I am now leaning very heavily toward focusing SML on XML fragments
>> so that SML data (the word 'document' is not in the SML draft spec)
>> starts with the 'content' production rule of the XML spec.  No
>> prolog, no misc.  SML data have zero or more elements and can be
>> entirely text.
>
>I assume you mean the following? 
>
>[43] content ::= (element | CharData | Reference | CDSect | PI 
>| Comment)*
>
>So an SML data fragment is not necessarily a valid XML document 
>as it can be entirely text? And so an XML processor may not be 
>able to process an SML document? Is that correct?

Not correct.  My thinking is that there is no such thing as SML
document.  There is only SML data and there is no assumption that
SML data is stored anywhere or finite in length.  If SML data is
stored in a file and it is used as a well-formed external entity
from an XML document, it can be processed using XML processors.

The production rule is something like:

   SMLData ::= (element | CharData)*

Best,

Don Park    -   mailto:donpark at docuverse.com
Docuverse   -   http://www.docuverse.com


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;
unsubscribe 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)