• From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• To: "Richard L. Goerwitz" <richard@g...>, David Megginson <david@m...>
• Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1999 13:43:20 -0700

At 03:17 PM 4/7/99 -0400, Richard L. Goerwitz wrote:

I'm with David Megginson here - you really have to stand on one
leg and not think of the word "rhinocerous" to see the XML spec as
mandating the checking of unreferenced entities.  

>(Incidentally, does it bother anyone else that you can have valid docu-
>ments that aren't well-formed?  

No you can't.  It's not an XML document if it's not well-formed, and
validity is a property of XML documents. -Tim



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...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Validating Entities (was Re: XML Torture Test: Parsers Fail)
    • From: Richard Goerwitz <richard@g...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Validating Entities (was Re: XML Torture Test: Parsers Fail)
• Next by Date: RE: Megginson and XMLNews
• Previous by thread: Megginson and XMLNews
• Next by thread: Re: Validating Entities (was Re: XML Torture Test: Parsers Fail)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread