Why is this JC test not-wf?
Ok, so I'm running through the James Clark tests with my new parser and I don't exactly understand why not-wf\sa\081.xml is not well formed necessarily. Here is the text: <!DOCTYPE doc [ <!ENTITY e SYSTEM "nul"> ]> <doc a="&e;"></doc> So it defines an external entity 'e', which resolves to a file named 'nul', which is an empty file. Then it references that entity as the value of the attribute 'a'. To me, that seems perfectly fine. If could have legally written manually: <doc a=""></doc> and I think I could legally if not validating, then why would not the result of the test file give exactly that result? And if it does give that result, how is that less well formed than what I could have typed myself? There is no prohibition against empty attribute values that I know of. 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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1 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...)
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format