Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
In article <037a01bf6990$a1a95720$80f5a8c0@2...>, Takuki Kamiya <kamiya@r...> wrote: >E34 seems to conclude that it is now legitimately made to be a well- >formedness constraint by saying that: > >"the Name given in the entity reference must match that in an entity > declaration that does not occur within the external subset or a > parameter entity." Yes, I misread it. This seems to mean that a non-validating parser that reads the external subset even when standalone="yes" must perform a check when expanding entities to see where they were declared. What is the status of a document like this: <?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?> <!DOCTYPE foo [ <!ENTITY % pe "<!ENTITY e 'hello'>"> %pe; ]> <foo>&e;</foo> &e; refers to a declaration that occurs in a parameter entity, so it is not well-formed. Or did they mean "external parameter entity"? There seems to be a typo in the Rationale for this erratum. The second sentence contrasts a processor that doesn't read the external subset with one that (also) doesn't. -- Richard -- Spam filter: to mail me from a .com/.net site, put my surname in the headers. "The Internet is really just a series of bottlenecks joined by high speed networks." - Sam Wilson 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/ or CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1 Unsubscribe by posting to majordom@i... the message unsubscribe xml-dev (or) unsubscribe xml-dev your-subscribed-email@your-subscribed-address Please note: New list subscriptions now closed in preparation for transfer to OASIS.
|
