Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Richard L. Goerwitz wrote: > (Incidentally, does it bother anyone else that you can have valid docu- > ments that aren't well-formed? Not by definition: a non-WF document simply isn't an XML document at all, and calling it "valid" is no more meaningful than calling the text of this email "valid". In any case, I don't understand your example. > Imagine an external entity used inside > an attribute value? If declared in such a way that a non-validating > parser doesn't realize it's external, then the validating parser will > reject it as an error (can't have external entities in this context). References to external entities in attribute values are not WF. All this means is that a non-validating parser that doesn't read all the external parameter entities may fail to detect certain WF violations. A validating parser, or for that matter a non-validating but all-entity-reading parser, will correctly reject such a document as non-WF. -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan@c... You tollerday donsk? N. You tolkatiff scowegian? Nn. You spigotty anglease? Nnn. You phonio saxo? Nnnn. Clear all so! 'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5) 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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1 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...)
|
