> I agree, although for a different reason. I've just gotten to writing this part
> of the code and have to admit that having to parse something the parser can
> parse for me makes me very grumpy indeed. Note that the EnumerationValue
> element is used by both enumerated attributes and notation attributes.
I also agree. Indeed, it was the asymmetry between NOTATION/enumeration
and the other eight types (which require no ancillary data) that
made Ron & I agree to move them to elements in the first place.
One has to work harder than necessary either way. But the main
principle of XML back-ends is that all parsing should be done by
the parser! There should be no second-level parsers that have
to decipher some embedded syntax.
(This means that I deprecate ENTITIES, NMTOKENS, and IDREFS.)
-- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org You tollerday donsk? N. You tolkatiff scowegian? Nn. You spigotty anglease? Nnn. You phonio saxo? Nnnn. Clear all so! 'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)