• To: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• Subject: Re: ANN: xpath1() scheme for XPointer
• From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 10:41:08 -0700
• Cc: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>,"K. Ari Krupnikov" <ari@c...>, xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <200210281520.KAA13094@m...>
• References: <200210281520.KAA13094@m...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.2b) Gecko/20021016

John Cowan wrote:

>
>
> I'm confused.  If the above is meant to be a WF XML document, it isn't.
> The tags of the root element have to be explicitly within the document
> entity -- an entity reference is not legal at top level.  See 
> production 1.

Er uh you sure John?  I betcha most parsers accept it.  The XML Spec 
never did a good job of making up its mind whether it was defining the 
pre-entity-expansion or post-entity-expansion infoset.  The correct 
solution is of course to discard all entities except numeric character 
references, cf XML-SW. -Tim

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: ANN: xpath1() scheme for XPointer
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• References:
  • Re: ANN: xpath1() scheme for XPointer
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• Prev by Date: RE: ANN: xpath1() scheme for XPointer
• Next by Date: Re: XML as "passive data" (Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!)
• Previous by thread: Re: ANN: xpath1() scheme for XPointer
• Next by thread: Re: ANN: xpath1() scheme for XPointer
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread