If I'm reading it right, I would say the SGML parser is correct. The (
,,,)+ says one or more of those things has to appear after the pfmatr. The
(...)* part of &text doesn't really mean anything. That says the content
inside is optional repeating. Not sure what the specs say, but I would
expect to see another element required. So your model sort of reads like:
(topic | null | graphic)+
null equalling no element used from the &text choices.
I don't know what parsers Arbortext uses these days. Have you tried
running your XML version through Saxon to see what is says? Could just be
a bug. Do you still have a copy of OmniMark around? I'd see what it said
for the SGML version.
..dan
> Good Day!
> Hope someone here can shed some light on this situation. Thanks in advance
> for your attention to this somewhat long post.
>
> We have a customer who wants their data in SGML format, rather than the
> XML of the majority. We do our input and publishing using XML, then change
> the DTD declaration (and remove ,
> etc.) to point to an "identical" SGML DTD. Seemed to be working fine,
> until... Someone thought to click the completeness check in Editor this
> revision cycle with the SGML open. Context checking was still 'on', but
> the SGML was reporting missing content in a place the XML did not and does
> not.
>
> Changing the PROCEDURE ELEMENT declaration in the SGML DTD to "...(topic |
> %text; |graphic)*))..." (use an '*' in place of the '+') eliminates the
> error message. My belief is that the XML parser sees the %text; entity
> being satisfied (%text;'s '*'s allow for zero content) as also satisfying
> the '+', but the SGML parser sees the '+' as overriding the entity's '*'s.
>
> While it may seem the easy answer is, make both use '*' rather than '+',
> the question remains: why don't they both return the error? Not sure which
> one should be considered 'wrong', if either, regarding the intent behind
> the structure, but shouldn't both parsers return the same response with
> what are essentially identical inputs?
>
> Error message with SGML:
> "/procedure Unexpected end tag encountered. More content is
> required."
>
> Here's a 'sanitized' example of the tagged data, and the relevant portions
> of the DTDs.
>
> Data:
> ...<procedure...><title>Title
> Data</title><pfmatr><pretopic>...</pretopic><pretopic>...</pretopic></pfmatr>(cursor
> here as result of error)</procedure>...
>
> XML DTD:
>
>
> > | table | revst | revend)*" >
>
> > mfmatr?, chapter*) | increv | tr+) >
> > (pfmatr?, (topic | %text; |graphic)+))
> | %deleted;) >
>
> SGML DTD:
>
>
> > | table)*" >
>
> > mfmatr?, chapter*) | increv | tr+)
> +(revst|revend) >
> > (pfmatr?, (topic | %text; |graphic)+))
> | %deleted;) >
>
> Thanks for any insight,
> Steve Thompson
> TAD Technical
> Boeing-IDS Technical Publications
> +1(316)977-0515
> MC K83-08
> The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it, and a lie is a lie even
> if everyone believes it.
>
> NOTICE: This communication may contain proprietary or other confidential
> information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you
> have received this communication in error, please do not print, copy,
> retransmit, disseminate, or otherwise use the information. Also, please
> indicate to the sender that you have received this e-mail in error, and
> delete the copy you received. Any and all views expressed are the current
> understanding of the sender and should not be interpreted as an expression
> of official Boeing Company policy or position.
>
> Les renseignements contenus dans ce message peuvent être confidentiels. Si
> vous n'êtes pas le destinataire visé ou une personne autorisée à lui
> remettre ce courriel, vous êtes par la présente avisé qu'il est
> strictement interdit d'utiliser, de copier ou de distribuer ce courriel,
> de dévoiler la teneur de ce message ou de prendre quelque mesure fondée
> sur l'information contenue. Vous êtes donc prié d'aviser immédiatement
> l'expéditeur de cette erreur et de détruire ce message sans garder de
> copie.
>
>
>
>
>
