• From: Daniel Veillard <veillard@r...>
• To: Richard Tobin <richard@c...>
• Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:37:28 -0400

On Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 01:20:33PM +0100, Richard Tobin wrote:
> >The XML spec has nothing to say about what the correct behavior of a
> >browser is
> 
> It says that after a fatal error the processor (=parser) must not
> continue to pass data to the application in the normal way.  The
> point of this is to ensure that applications - of which browsers
> are a canonical example - do not accept not-well-formed documents
> without at least making this clear to the user.

  Richard is of course 100% right. There is absolutely no ambiguity
in that part of the XML Recommendation, and the point that a fatal-error
means to stop further normal processing and raise the error at the application
level:
   http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml#dt-fatal

  Violating this is a clear non-conformance issue. The spec *does* indicate
what is the correct behaviour.

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Network http://redhat.com/products/network/
veillard@r...  | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/

• References:
  • Re: Bad News on IE6 XML Support
    • From: Richard Tobin <richard@c...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Bad News on IE6 XML Support
• Next by Date: Re: Bad News on IE6 XML Support
• Previous by thread: Re: Bad News on IE6 XML Support
• Next by thread: RE: Bad News on IE6 XML Support
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread