Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Hi Micah,
On Mon, 2002-11-04 at 22:19, Micah Dubinko wrote:
> Rick Jelliffe wrote:
>
> >So no DTD is needed. If someone uses character entities in a document
> >being sent to a lightweight parser that didn't provide its own
> declarations,
> >it would be a WF error, as currently exists.
>
> Question: why is this currently a WF error, as opposed to a validity error?
>
> Are there any known cases of processing that *depends* on this being
> a WF error (and would thus be surprised if it someday became allowed)?
Isn't it the case for any processing that depends on this being an error
and uses a non validating parser (or tells a validating parser to skip
validation)?
The next question is probably: if it's not an error, what is the parser
expected to send that will be understood by let's say a XSLT
transformation?
Eric
--
Rendez-vous a Paris (Forum XML).
http://www.technoforum.fr/integ2002/index.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org http://dyomedea.com
(W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1 http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
