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

Re: Is validity an option?

• From: "Jonathan Borden" <jborden@m...>
• To: "David Brownell" <db@e...>
• Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 18:39:22 -0500

David:

>
>I think that the "both" case is the most useful one in terms of
>"write once, run anywhere" portable code.
>
    Exactly. This parse tree content based classification (especially
"both") is equally interesting for me as is validation vs. non-validation.
Generation of validation error messages is something the *user* of the
document decides the importance of while the content of a document is
something the *author* is concerned with. Default attributes and entity
expansions look alot like content to me.

Jonathan Borden
http://jabr.ne.mediaone.net



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...)

• Prev by Date: Re: Between raw and cooked II: Are? DTDs are just for validation
• Next by Date: Re: Why Doesn't IE5 use the DTD to Validate?
• Previous by thread: Re: Is validity an option?
• Next by thread: RE: XML query language
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread