• From: Richard Tobin <richard@c...>
• To: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>, <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1998 17:07:16 GMT

> (SGML has a CDATA keyword you can use instead of content models: XML was
> felt not to need it because you could use <![CDATA[, however that perhaps
> shows the mind of the XML WG at that time, in that they were down-playing
> the need for schemas.)

Surely the unanswerable argument against CDATA elements in XML was
they prevent you from parsing a document without the DTD.  Just like
optional start/end tags, and unmarked empty elements.

-- Richard

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: CDATA by any other name... (was The raw and the cooked)
    • From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>

• Prev by Date: Re: CDATA by any other name... (was The raw and the cooked)
• Next by Date: Re: CDATA by any other name... (was The raw and the cooked)
• Previous by thread: Re: CDATA by any other name... (was The raw and the cooked)
• Next by thread: RE: CDATA by any other name... (was The raw and the cooked)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread