Subject: Re: Microsot parser is OK (Was: Re: Copyright symbol in FOP) From: "Nikolai Grigoriev" <grig@xxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 22:20:20 +0400 |
> > <!ENTITY amp "&"> > > <!ENTITY lt "<"> > > > > What is strange is that neither XT nor Saxon reported that error. > > Is it a conformant behaviour? > > > It depends of course on what XML parser you are using with XT or Saxon, not > on the XSLT processor itself. Sure. So the one wired into Instant Saxon is probably faulty; is it XP or something else? > I suspect an XML parser should report this as an error. Definitely so. This kind of expression is blamed as non-well-formed n the XML Spec, and parsers (even non-validating ones) are obliged to report deviations from well-formedness in the whole document including the DTD. > The XML version of the XML specification itself, however, contains > the line > > <!ENTITY lt "<"> > > and most parsers accept it: but IE5 doesn't. For once I think MS > are in the right. The XML version of the XML specification contains more bugs (I have had to correct a couple of them when rendering it to XSL FO; see www.renderx.com/xmlspec.html). It is quite natural: I presume the parsers weren't mature enough when the spec was issued, and there was no tool available for checking it through. However, I was used to the idea that most people are sticking to the spec, and MS feels free to amend it (that's why my spontaneous reaction was to consider it a Microsoft bug). In this case, I see the exact contrary: no one really cares to respect the spec except Microsoft. Shame on other parser developers ;-). (I feel I am drifting off the topic, so I stop ;-)). Best regards, Nikolai Grigoriev RenderX XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: Microsot parser is OK (Was: Re:, Kay Michael | Thread | Re: Microsot parser is OK (Was: Re:, David Carlisle |
RE: including the HTML <BR> in XSL , Jay Marvin | Date | RE: Simple Problem, Mark Swardstrom |
Month |