Re: DL content model

Peter Flynn (
Mon, 14 Nov 94 11:35:39 EST

<DD>Definition without preceding term</DD>
> </DL>
> And if it does, wouldn't
> <!ELEMENT DL - - (DT+, DD)+>
> be more sensible? Or am I missing something?

I still think it should be DD* need to allow for more than one
block of definition text after the DT.