• From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• To: John Cowan <cowan@l...>, XML Dev <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Thu, 06 Aug 1998 18:54:26 -0700

At 04:05 PM 8/6/98 -0400, John Cowan wrote:
>So technically a
>document like
>
>	<foo
>
>though not WF, is not "in error", since neither "error" nor "must"
>is anywhere applied to what is wrong with it.

Well, the spec is not perfect, but it makes it pretty clear that the
above, while you may wish to apply the English word "document" to it,
is not, in the terms of the spec, an "XML Document", and that a 
conforming XML Processor would emit some serious complaints when fed
this particular character sequence. -T.

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...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XML errors and fatal errors.
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@l...>

• Prev by Date: XSchema converters
• Next by Date: Re: How to process Japanese Code with XMLDSO(MS-XML)
• Previous by thread: Re: XML errors and fatal errors.
• Next by thread: Re: XML errors and fatal errors.
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread