• From: James Clark <jjc@j...>
• To: "XML Developers' List" <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Sat, 13 Dec 1997 17:04:58 -0500

I've updated my collection of test cases at

  ftp://ftp.jclark.com/pub/test/xmltest.zip

I changed one test case (088.xml) to reflect a change in the XML spec
and added some more tests.  There are now 164 test cases which all fail
to be well formed according to the XML Proposed Tecommendation.

I've also updated my XML tokenizer/well-formedness checker at

  ftp://ftp.jclark.com/pub/test/xmltok.zip

I believe this is now up to date for the XML Proposed Recommendation.  I
know of one well-formedness violation it fails to detect: when the
encoding is UTF-8 it fails to detect illegal characters whose encoding
requires more than one byte (ie 0xFFFF, 0xFFFE, surrogates and
characters >= 0x10000).  If you find any others, please let me know.

James


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Prev by Date: Re: Classification: XML Parser Features
• Next by Date: XML software for Visual Basic
• Previous by thread: ?SGML decl. for XML to run in NSGMLS?
• Next by thread: XML software for Visual Basic
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread