• From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• To: xml-dev@i...
• Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 22:55:59 -0700

At 02:32 PM 6/30/98 -0400, Tom Otvos wrote:
>Why can an element's mixed content only be declared as PCDATA, not CDATA?

SGML compatibility, sigh.  Because CDATA content is broken as designed
in SGML; for example, you can't declare element <X> to be of type CDATA
and then do:

 <X>xxx<Z>..</Z>xx</X>

Because the rules say that a CDATA element is terminated not, as you
might expect, by its end tag, but by the first occurrence of ETAGO, 
a.k.a. "</".  

Anyhow, the more I think about it, any of these schemes that depend
on a magic end-delimiter, e.g. "</anything>" or "]]>" are just
amateurish and broken.  We've known for years how to do this;
either escape delimiters or put in a byte count.

The idea of a built-in signal for a base64 encoding is starting
to look better and better to me. -Tim


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

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: PCDATA vs CDATA
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@l...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Attributes with Intent (and namespaces)
• Next by Date: Re: extensibility in XSchema?
• Previous by thread: Re: PCDATA vs CDATA
• Next by thread: Re: PCDATA vs CDATA
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread