Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Simon St.Laurent wrote: > >But in this specific case, I don't really understand how using PEs > >allows redefinition of names. Doesn't XML 1.0 preclude that? > > The trick is to include create a parameter entity for the element or > attribute names, assemble the prefix and the name there, and then make the > declaration using the assembled PE. > > This apparently lets you slide through with no space under section 4.4.5 as > 'reference in literal' rather than 4.4.8. > > This came up back in March, and this seemed to be the accepted answer. (I > started out thinking it was prohibited.) I don't think it lets you go as > far as leaving out the colon and having no prefix, though that could > probably be accomplished with an additional INCLUDE/IGNORE section for each > declaration... > Fine. In reality, the DTD issue may be more of a DTD processor value issue rather than an XML spec issue per se. A "namespace conformant" DTD validator would validate based on expanded names rather than prefixed names. This could be handled by a change to the "Element Valid" validity constraint (not really a big deal - IHMO). "Validity Constraint: Element Valid An element is valid if there is a declaration matching elementdecl where the Name [jb insert QName] matches the element type, and one of the following holds: ..." This would make such a document "Namespace Valid" rather than "XML 1.0 Valid" -- perhaps this is a new category. Now that we have a good open source DTD processor... Jonathan Borden The Open Healthcare Group http://www.openhealth.org
|
