Hi, thanks for the answer.
> But, you'll probably like what will be generated by these settings: > * Indent: *yes* > * Indentation: 0 > * Max. line length: 10000000 Ja, ok, this looks nice ;-) > What follows is well-formed XML (I've shifted the output 4 spaces to the > right to better show what has been generated): I knew that it was well-formed, thanks, but I was not able to imagine why the XML was generated in this unusually formatted way. kind regards Armin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hussein Shafie" <[email protected]> To: "Armin Sander" <armin at replicator.org> Cc: <xmleditor-support at xmlmind.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2005 10:06 AM Subject: Re: [XXE] Non-Indented output looks weird (XMLMind Standard Edition V2.9p1) > Armin Sander wrote: >> when switching off the indent mode in Options/Options/Save, the XML >> output of an empty simplified docbook document looks a little weird: >> >> ====== >> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> >> <!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//OASIS//DTD Simplified DocBook XML V1.0//EN" >> "http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/xml/simple/1.0/sdocbook.dtd";> >> <article >> >>> <title >>> </title >>> <section >>> <title >>> </title >>> <para >>> </para >>> </section >>> </article >>> >> ====== >> >> I presume this is a bug, or? > > No this is absolutely not a bug. > > What follows is well-formed XML (I've shifted the output 4 spaces to the > right to better show what has been generated): > ========== > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?> > <!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//OASIS//DTD Simplified DocBook XML > V1.0//EN" > "http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/xml/simple/1.0/sdocbook.dtd";> > <article > ><title > ></title > ><section > ><title > ></title > ><para > ></para > ></section > ></article > > > ========== > > But, you'll probably like what will be generated by these settings: > * Indent: *yes* > * Indentation: 0 > * Max. line length: 10000000 > > > > >> BTW: Great Docbook Editor!!! > > Thanks for the compliments. Note that XMLmind XML Editor is *not* a > DocBook editor. > > We support DocBook because: > * It is a hard-to-support document type, and therefore this is a good demo > for us. > * We happen to use this document type for our own documentation. > > To meet the same objectives, we could have used a document type other than > Docbook (e.g. TEI). > >
