• To: elharo@m... (Elliotte Rusty Harold)
• Subject: Re: We need SAX features to say a parser supports XML
• From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 10:14:40 -0400 (EDT)
• Cc: jcowan@r... (John Cowan), xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <p04330103b9defa077c95@[192.168.254.4]> from "Elliotte Rusty Harold" at Oct 25, 2002 09:43:36 AM

Elliotte Rusty Harold scripsit:

> Well, that's one of the tricky points. It is *not* a well-formedness 
> error for an XML 1.0 document to label itself version="1.1", 
> version="2.0", or version="mauve". This is neither a violation of the 
> BNF grammar nor any well-formedness constraint in the XML 1.0 spec. 

Read the errata page.

-- 
John Cowan                                <jcowan@r...>     
http://www.reutershealth.com              http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Yakka foob mog.  Grug pubbawup zink wattoom gazork.  Chumble spuzz.
    -- Calvin, giving Newton's First Law "in his own words"

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: We need SAX features to say a parser supports XML
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• References:
  • Re: We need SAX features to say a parser supports XML1.1
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: We need SAX features to say a parser supports XML1.1
• Next by Date: Re: We need SAX features to say a parser supports XML
• Previous by thread: Re: We need SAX features to say a parser supports XML1.1
• Next by thread: Re: We need SAX features to say a parser supports XML
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread