| I think we would not want %text to be the content model in any case
| (since that would give folks the wrong idea that this was displayable
| content); more preferable would be one of the following:
I did that deliberately to allow markup, as in...
It depends on why this extension to META is needed. Any extension should
characterize the proposed content better before proposing a content model
or declared content.
| Also, whatever attribute name you choose for SCHEME, it should
| have a declared value of NOTATION, not NAME.
Ah, good. I intended CDATA, not NAME. True, we could make it a
NOTATION, but as we have no place to declare NOTATIONs, the gain
is not too large.
As a notation it could be tied to an FPI which would be an improvement
over CDATA. We can declare notations in the DTD and we can specify
their associated FPIs in the sample SGML Open catalog. The HTML3.0 DTD
already employs notations for the STYLE element, so we should continue
in that direction.
Glenn