At 02:30 PM 2/5/00 +0100, Armin Pfarr wrote: >It is astonishing for somebody who has some knowledge of SGML (like me) that >the CDATA construct in XML differs from the one in SGML at all AND STILL >USES THE SAME NAME.
I believe that XML and SGML have the same handling for CDATA attributes. >The same goes for the treatment of public identifiers in XML. They W3C just >forgot to introduce catalogs Lots of people wanted catalogs. Nobody anywhere could introduce evidence of widely-accepted and interoperable way to handle PUBLIC identifiers, so they only made it into XML on a private-use basis. If you have your own catalogs, you can use PUBLIC [check the spec], you just can't try to interoperate with them, because it doesn't work. > Another annoying "feature" is, that SGML allows a "< " >in PCDATA, XML wants to have "< ". I could easily continue with points >like this. Parser simplification. Unanimous choice of everyone. Lots of these decisions is the reason that we have dozens of excellent freeware XML parsers. Oh well... I'm probably wasting this lists's bandwidth, since even if Mr. Pfarr were right, XML is a done deal. -Tim
