Subject: Re: [xsl] Transformation of From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 13:20:53 GMT |
That does not follow. As long as it MAY raise an error, then it is compliant. And the word "reserved" does mean that it is not permitted. This thread should be on xml-dev not here, but I agree with Dimitre. parsers have to accept names beginning with xml. (They are always free to make warnings, warnings and other messages are not constrained in any way). The whole notion of "reserving" these things would be broken if parsers rejected them. For example when xml namespaces used xmlns or the XML stylesheet rec used xml-stylesheet or xml base used xml:base the assumption was that these things could be layered over an existing parser: the parsers accpt them but they won't appear in existing documents as they were "reserved". If parsers reject them then the layering would be somewhat broken. > A simple example - if you park your car in the space marked "Reserved > for the managing director" - how long do you think you will keep your job? If the car park attendant ensured that the space stayed reserved by building a wall around that slot, so stopping everyone, including the managing director, from parking there, how long would he keep _his_ job? David ________________________________________________________________________ This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit: http://www.star.net.uk ________________________________________________________________________
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Transformation of, Colin Paul Adams | Thread | Re: [xsl] Transformation of, Colin Paul Adams |
Re: [xsl] Transformation of, Colin Paul Adams | Date | Re: [xsl] Transformation of, Elliotte Harold |
Month |