Simple XML conformance
I have been preparing a set of XML documents and a collection of XML-aware tools to introduce newcomers to XML (on our VirtualXML course). I have encountered a surprisingly number of cases where an XML tool is unable to read an XML document. [There is not meant to be anything tricky here since Henry and I are actually trying to demonstrate how to learn XML by doing. We are not looking to "torture" the tools - more the reverse.] As a collection of XML documents I took: Jon Bosak's Shakespeare (elements and DTD) http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-xml-19980210.xml (elements, attributes and DTD (with PEs)) http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-2/ (elements, attributes, entities and DTD(with PEs and GEs)) [I point out that this is an excellent document for showing a wide range of XML constructs in a meaningful way.] (and a number of examples distributed with tools, including my own). Here are some of the problems ( I will not list the tools explicitly) - tool threw a fatal error because <?xml version="1.0"?> was absent - tool threw a fatal error because <!DOCTYPE was missing - REC-xml and DOM specify DTD but spec.dtd is not mounted - One content model in spec.dtd appeared to be inconsistent with the REC-xml (I may have th wrong spec.dtd but it was downloaded from w3.org) - one tool "skipped" general entity references (i.e. did not expand them) and threw a content model error - one tool regarded undeclared parameter entities in comments (in spec.dtd) as errors - several tools regard the absence of a DTD as a fatal error (i.e. they appear to be validating by default). As an example, I believe that it is likely that many tools when pointed at: http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-xml-19980210.xml will fail. I expect that by tweaking some of the tools with commandline switches I might be able to alter their behaviour, but I am slightly surprised that some tools will only read validatable files (e.g. the file <greeting>Hello World</greeting> is often not readable (unless "edited" to: <?xml version="1.0"?> <!DOCTYPE greeting [ <!ELEMENT greeting (ANY)> ]> <greeting>Hello World</greeting> Is there a definitive resource anywhere which explicitly states what behaviour can be expected from various types of parsers? I know it is inferable from the spec, but I suspect that not all implementers have taken identical interpretations. I would ideally like to have a matrix of parsers against standard "correct" [not always "valid"] documents and see how many conform. Henry and I are obviously keen to show that XML is simple to use with the correct tools and that interoperability is achievable. TIA P. (http://www.cmlconsulting.com) 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/ or CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1 Please note: New list subscriptions now closed in preparation for transfer to OASIS.
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