[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Mixed Content Models

• From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• To: Jerome McDonough <jmcdonou@l...>, xml-dev@i...
• Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 22:53:14 -0700

At 11:47 AM 9/21/98 -0700, Jerome McDonough wrote:
>	<!ELEMENT qstn   (#PCDATA | (preQTxt?, qstnLit?, postQTxt?, forward?,
>							  backward?, ivuInstr*))*
>
>Is this a legitimate content model under XML section 3.2.2?
>Msxml doesn't have a problem with it, and nsgmls using the -wxml flag
>also happily parses the DTD.  IBM's xml4j, however, complains:
>"Codebook.dtd: 1256, 33: This content model is not matched with the
>mixed model '(#PCDATA|FOO|BAR|. . .|BAZ)*': '(#PCDATA|(preQTxt?, qstnLit?,
>postQTxt?,forward?,backward?,ivuInstr*))*".

This is *totally* illegal per the spec.  Is that the msxml with IE4 
or IE5?  If 4, no biggie, they were up-front about being behind.  If 
IE5, I'm flabbergasted and MS needs to hear about it now.

As for nsgmls, James has been very up-front about its lack of 
completeness as an XML processor.  xml4j is right; I expect you'd
also get complaints from XP and Lark. -Tim

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Mixed Content Models
    • From: Jerome McDonough <jmcdonou@l...>

• Prev by Date: Order of #PCDATA in dtd - relevant? or XP bug?
• Next by Date: Re: URNs, FPIs, and RFC 1737
• Previous by thread: Re: Mixed Content Models
• Next by thread: Re: Mixed Content Models
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread