• From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>
• To: xml-dev@i...
• Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 15:01:39 GMT

> I do not think it is superflous to allow ¤.

Given that this is defined to be the same as $ at the lowest level of xml
parsing, I can not see any reason why the arguments currently being
applied to get rid of attributes (which are nowhere nearly as closely
identified with the `equivalent' element markup) do not apply to this
case as well.

David

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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
unsubscribe 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: [SML]
    • From: "Don Park" <donpark@d...>

• Prev by Date: re: [SML] Without attrs, you don't need empty elements...
• Next by Date: re: re: [SML] Without attrs, you don't need empty elements...
• Previous by thread: SML - a vote against
• Next by thread: RE: [SML]
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread