Arjun Ray wrote:

>  PEs need to die.  Killing them off, however, needs additions to DTD syntax
>  to cover the situations for which to date PEs have been used as kludges.

The only reason I'd have for keeping them is to allow a DTD to be broken into
separate files. As long as that was catered for somehow, I'd be happy to see them
die.

I could do without the ability to group element and attribute declarations too -
like PEs, I think they make DTDs more difficult to read, particularly if you're
looking for a particular element declaration. I'd rather search for the string
"<!ELEMENT foo" than sift through all the places that foo gets mentioned in the
DTD.

Terseness in DTD redesign is of minimal importance...;-)


--
Regards,

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



-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org> , an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> 

The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>