Don Park donpark at docuverse.com
Tue Nov 30 16:09:38 GMT 1999


>> I do not think it is superflous to allow ¤.
>Given that this is defined to be the same as $ at the lowest 
>level of xml
>parsing, I can not see any reason why the arguments currently being
>applied to get rid of attributes (which are nowhere nearly as closely
>identified with the `equivalent' element markup) do not apply to this
>case as well.

Not allowing ¤ means:

1. SML parsers will have to check for it which
   complicates implementation.

2. SML spec will have to explain it which
   complicates the spec.

For above two reasons, I do think ¤ should
be allowed.

Does this answer your question?


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)

More information about the Xml-dev mailing list