Re: FrameMaker 5.5.6 and XML experience?

[Marcus Carr <mrc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

We might be getting too far off track here for a Frame forum - if anyone
feels that this should be discussed in another forum, don't hesitate to say
so.

Dan Emory wrote:

> James P. Clark has written a technical note describing the differences
> between XML and SGML, where, in all cases, XML is more constrained.

No, that simply isn't the case. An example is the decision to drop some of
the SGML declared values for attributes (NUTOKEN(S), NUMBER(S) and NAME(S))
and effectively replace them with CDATA. In many cases it's difficult to
compare XML and SGML, but it isn't correct to state that XML is always more
constrained.

> The
> paper identifies a number of SGML constructs, data types, etc. which are
> "not allowed" in "well-formed" XML.

Actually, they would be allowed in well-formed data - they wouldn't be
allowed in a DTD you wished to use to check the validity of a document. A
well-formed document doesn't make use of a DTD - that's the whole point. An
XML document may be well-formed and valid or just well-formed. I don't mean
to sound pedantic, but terminology is in this case crucial to clarity.

> You can get hold of the paper at the following web address:
>
>         http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-sgml-xml-971215

It's an excellent paper - I've referenced it several times recently - once
when writing an XML course for developers and once when doing an XML
presentation for the recent SGML/XML Asia Pacific conference.


--
Regards,

Marcus Carr                      email:  mrc@allette.com.au
___________________________________________________________________
Allette Systems (Australia)      www:    http://www.allette.com.au
___________________________________________________________________
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
       - Einstein



** To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@omsys.com **
** with "unsubscribe framers" (no quotes) in the body.   **