Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > May be we should use the same vocabulary as the RFC 4646. For > instance, you use "date" when the RFC uses (except for the > <ltru> element) "added". Yes, I wanted the same attribute name for all dates. With a DTD some ABNF details are lost, I've used the name for a hint about the real type (NMTOKEN isn't very precise for dates ;-) > Or you use "tag" when the RFC uses subtag or tag, Same idea. In the version supporting ID-XREF-checks I could keep "subtag" as is, and use "tag" only as attribute for the grandfathered, redundant, prefix, and deprecated elements. > I do not see Preferred-value in your schema? It's the optional (#IMPLIED) "tag" in a <deprecated> element. If I'd split "tag" vs. "subtag" a "tag" is syntactically the same as "xml:lang", but of course I can't abuse that as name. Your RELAXed spec. is Greek to me. That's no problem, but it also won't work as is with a DTD validator. With my version I'm sure that only descriptions and comments are "text", the rest is either a "date" or a "tag" (modulo "subtag"). Frank _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru at ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.