Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Simon St.Laurent wrote: > On Tue, 2001-11-20 at 09:43, Dan Mabbutt wrote: > >>Jeff, >> >>Thanks very much! Your message was "on target" for me. >> >>Yes, I did know most of what you wrote (and, in particular, I was aware that >>the syntax "(#PCDATA)*" is watered down mixed content), but I wasn't >>completely sure that there was no other possible reason for doing it. I also >>know that it will validate correctly in the parsers I have tried. That's why >>I used the word, "meaningful" instead of "incorrect." >> > > The reason I tend to use (#PCDATA)* is that it's easier to extend later, > just by slapping in extra elements separated by |. > > The mixed content syntax seems pretty open in fairly silly ways, but > multiple approaches pass muster. Another reason to write (#PCDATA)* is to remind people that #PCDATA always means 0 or more characters; it's been a while since people wrote (#PCDATA)+, thinking thereby (wrongly) to enforce one or more characters, but it doesn't hurt to avoid confusion. Lauren -- ----------- Lauren Wood, Director of Product Technology, SoftQuad Software Chair, XML 2001 - Information at www.xmlconference.org
|
