• From: Eric Baatz - Sun Microsystems Labs BOS <ebaatz@b...>
• To: xml-dev@i...
• Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 15:45:30 -0400 (EDT)

I don't understand why such a wide choice of characters are allowed in
in the June XML Syntax specification.

  [7] Nmtoken ::= (NameChar)+
  
Because

  [4] NameChar ::= Letter | Digit | MiscName
  [3] MiscName ::= '.' | '-' | '_' | ':' | CombiningChar | Ignorable | Extender
  [87] Ignorable ::= a whole bunch of characters like "zero width non-joiner",
                     "right-to-left mark", and "zero width no-break space"
                     
This seems to allow Nmtokens that aren't visible to the human eye,
for example, consisting of a single zero width non-joiner.

My limited understanding of SGML suggests that a Nmtoken is more like
a Name rather than a superset of it.  For that matter, is "9" a sensible
Nmtoken?


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To unsubscribe, send to majordomo@i... the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (rzepa@i...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Too much latitude in Nmtoken characters?
    • From: Mark Brissenden <markb@g...>

• Prev by Date: #x3000 inconsistency in June XML Syntax spec?
• Next by Date: Re: Too much latitude in Nmtoken characters?
• Previous by thread: #x3000 inconsistency in June XML Syntax spec?
• Next by thread: Re: Too much latitude in Nmtoken characters?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread