My very kind thanks for your information. I realized I'd not formed my
question very well (pun intended), but ^x had already left my neurons and
so the letter went forth.
Where might I get the XML TEI spec? I'm working on an academic digital
diss. project and need--wherever possible--to be TEI conformant for
various reasons, including--most of all--not reinventing the wheel.
Oh, but on the <P> point, since SGML ALLOWS a close tag, again, if I use
namespaces for say making <tei:P>, and always close each </P>, does that
work or not? If it seems redundant, please be merciful, I'm a Sanskritist
and their syntax wore me out so I'm a bit punchy with xml's language!
On Sun, 27 Dec 1998, Peter Flynn wrote:
> [log in to unmask] writes
> > If I inlcude some tags from--say--TEI Lite, which is SGML and does not
> > have close tags for--say--<p>,
> But TEI Lite _does_ have end-tags for <P>. It's just that using the
> end-tag is optional. Perhaps a better example would be PTR or INDEX
> > will that mean that my xml document is not well-formed?
> Yes. In XML all elements must have start- and end-tags unless they
> are declared as EMPTY and expressed as <PTR/> (the alternative being
> <PTR></PTR> and never having any content).
> > Or will my closing of the xmlns: tag that is ref'd to TEI
> > serve to be "well-formed"?
> Nope. There is no mechanism defined to make or allow an XML processor
> to read an SGML DTD and work out that <tei:PTR> in your XML document
> actually means <tei:PTR/>. Be nice if there was, but it would have
> meant washing out all the shortcuts that XML makes and forcing it to
> include all the original SGML stuff that was removed which made it
> XML...just so it could read SGML DTDs.
> The easy way is to use the XML version of TEI Lite (Patrice Bonhomme)
> and copy the declarations from there into your new DTD.