> In other words, XML processors may (and should) treat
>
> <br></br>
>
> and
>
> <br/>
>
> as equivalent, but document authors might want to make the distinction
> so that pre-WebSGML SGML parsers can handle their documents.
Ah. Pardon me my ignorance. Different syntax for empty elements
in XML or SGML was a nuisance anyway, so this seems to be a one more thing
fixed.
<CLIP>
> SAX as it currently stands is not designed to preserve most lexical
> information; in the future, we may devise a SAX level-2 to return this
> information, but since most applications that need it will probably
> use a DOM anyway, the demand may not be strong enough.
If i understood this correctly, SAX is also not designed for
interoperatibility. If you want to generate pre-WebSGML from
XML using SAX (and accept that lexical information is not preserved), you
still would need the ability to detect empty declared elements.
- Jani