Subject: RE: XML is broken (was Re: Why Doesn't IE5 use the DTD toValidate?) From: "Jonathan Borden" <jborden@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 21:56:07 -0500 |
Sarah Mitchell wrote: > > > 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! ... > > 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. > I, for one, agree that IE5 does the correct thing here, and as James Clark points out in a related message, the correct behavior is to require parsers which process <?xml version="1.0" standalone="no" ?> documents to read the external subset (and expand external entities and default attributes). Validation itself is not the point. To me, generating a standard parse tree is the point. This behavior ought depend on the (default)standalone="no" value rather than the presence of an ELEMENT attribute. Whether or not to generate validation errors ought be up to the client. Jonathan Borden http://jabr.ne.mediaone.net XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: XPDL (was Re: XML is broken), Gavin Thomas Nicol | Thread | RE: Why Doesn't IE5 use the DTD to, Ed Nixon |
Re: XML is broken (was Re: Why Does, Simon St.Laurent | Date | Why Doesn't IE5 use the DTD to Vali, Jelks Cabaniss |
Month |