Subject: Re: XML is broken (was Re: Why Doesn't IE5 use the DTD toValidate?) From: Sara Mitchell <smitchel@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 12:33:43 -0800 |
James Clark's responses on the issue have cleared up the issue from my perspective. I agree that the XML spec is not as explicit as it should be on what forces a validating parser to validate and that has allowed Microsoft to slide. But please don't suggest a whole new set of rules! "Simon St.Laurent" wrote: > > Well, if IE 5 isn't broken, maybe it's time to consider (and discuss) > whether the XML spec isn't broken, and badly. > [SNIP] > A better validation approach would: > * Not interfere with well-formed documents (attribute defaulting done > different) We don't need another set of rules. I understand that much of this is awkward to people who are new to XML and it may not be clear why some things have to be as complicated as they are. But adding on a new set of rules just makes it more complicated, not less so. > * Provide a simple mechanism for documents to identify their type, not all > the details about their their structure. > * Be reliable. Applications could control how documents are validated, > instead of relying on the document to provide them with a roadmap. Again, this is part of the strength of SGML and XML. Information needs to identify how it should be handled, don't stuff it in a separate application! There are certainly cases where it's advisable for a receiving application to demand validation -- and other cases where the author needs to demand validation. But having that information in the document itself is important. > * Describe more than just text and elements. People are working on this area and it's appropriate for some things. But don't demand that documents with information for human consumption fit into a more rigid requirement needed for processing data. There are two audiences here, and the requirements for the information should fit the audience. > * Allow supporting tools (like XSL and XLink, which benefit greatly from a > validating environment) to demand validation of documents against schemas > before attempting processing. > [SNIP] This could be done quite simply by clarifying the XML spec to make it explicit that any presence of an ELEMENT declaration means that a validating parser must validate. Then Microsoft can either step back up to the bar or make it clear that IE5 is not a validating parser. XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
XML is broken (was Re: Why Doesn't , Simon St.Laurent | Thread | Re: XML is broken (was Re: Why Does, Simon St.Laurent |
Re: Why Doesn't IE5 use the DTD to , Jelks Cabaniss | Date | Re: transforming links for differen, Richard Lander |
Month |