I have a question about the formal public identifiers for each of these
DTD subsets. The file html.dtd, for example, contains the declaration
<!ENTITY % HTML.Version
"-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN"
-- Typical usage:
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML//EN">
<html>
...
</html>
--
>
My question: Is the seeming inconsistency between the entity
replacement text and the comment intentional, or has the comment not
been updated, or what? I noticed that html-1.dtd uses the "2.0" version
of the public identifier to reference [I assume] html.dtd.
The long & short: can someone tell me whether I am OK trusting the
"HTML.Version" version of the PUBLIC id?
-----------
Also, a (picky) comment. The element PLAINTEXT is declared as:
<!ELEMENT PLAINTEXT - O %literal>
and the entity "literal" is declared as
<!ENTITY % literal "CDATA"
-- historical, non-conforming parsing mode where
the only markup signal is the end tag
in full
-->
In view of the comment, shouldn't both of PLAINTEXT's minimization
indicators be '-'?
Just curious,
Kerry Burton