Norman Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > / Adam Di Carlo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say: > | > > 1) Run nsgmls or onsgmls without -wxml > | > > > | > > > nsgmls -wall -gues /usr/lib/sgml/declaration/xml.dcl qaml-faq.xml > | > > > onsgmls -wall -gues /usr/lib/sgml/declaration/xml.dcl qaml-faq.xml > | > > | > Ah. Pretend it's SGML. > | > | Hmm. Yah, I guess that's kinda what we're doing. I'm still not > | totally certain what part of the XML spec is involved here... I guess > | I should go back and read it ... > > XML is SGML.
Well, a fixed concrete reference syntax (is that the right way to say it?). > It's defined that way. I'm not sure there's any specific > part of the spec involved. But in XML, all of the things defined in the > SGML Declaration (that can theoretically vary in an SGML system) are > fixed. Hence the warning about an explicit declaration. Right. James Clark talked about this: http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-sgml-xml-971215 + The SGML declaration must be implied and cannot be explicitly present in the document entity I am not sure how one is supposed to work around this when using 'nsgmls'. i guess you just don't use -wxml. With OpenSP, I can use DTDDECL to associate the XML declaration implictly with the FPI. -- .....Adam Di [EMAIL PROTECTED]<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>
