Re: Levels

• Mail folder: html-archive
• Next message: Terry Allen: "Re: Where are Fonts and Phrases allowed? [Was: HTML 2.0 Call for Review ]"
• Previous message: Daniel W. Connolly: "Re: Where are Fonts and Phrases allowed? [Was: HTML 2.0 Call for Review ] "
• In-reply-to: Terry Allen: "Re: Levels"

Message-id: <9406102029.AA08140@ulua.hal.com>
To: html-ig@oclc.org
Subject: Re: Levels 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 10 Jun 1994 16:21:32 EDT."
             <199406102019.NAA03324@rock> 
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 1994 15:29:28 -0500
From: "Daniel W. Connolly" <connolly@hal.com>
Content-Length: 623

In message <199406102019.NAA03324@rock>, Terry Allen writes:
>Dan suggests using the same DTD but referring to it by
>3 different public identifiers.  But why is this better
>than 3 DTDs, perhaps produced automatically as subsets
>of a master DTD, if what is desired is to cut down on
>DTD maintenance?


I'm not sure if it'll end up as three completely independent
texts, or one big one with lots of marked sections and
two little things that look like:

	#define level_0
	#include "bigDTD"


Anyway... the point is that you will be able to express (and validate)
the fact that a doc contains only level 0 features.

Dan