Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 10:47 AM, Rick Jelliffe <rjelliffe@a...> wrote: > So there would be no use of > either "valid" (because the term is only used in the particular sense) or > "XSD-valid" (because it belongs to a different spec) in the XML > specification. The XML 1.0 spec, 5th edition mentions (in the section, "5.1 Validating and Non-Validating Processors): "Validating processors must, at user option, report violations of the constraints expressed by the declarations in the DTD, and failures to fulfill the validity constraints given in this specification.] To accomplish this, validating XML processors must read and process the entire DTD and all external parsed entities referenced in the document." This particular paragraph clearly conveys, that a XML document is valid *only* in the context of a DTD. This is no longer true given that XSD, RelaxNG and Schematron are also standard based XML validation languages, and most of the world recognizes these newer Schema languages. As suggested by Jim Tivy earlier, a generic phrase like "XML Schema" in the XML spec, while referring to XML validation would be helpful to readers, in the present context. > If you think that would prevent confusion, go for it! yes, I believe this change would prevent this confusion to a large extent. -- Regards, Mukul Gandhi
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
