• From: David Brownell <david-b@p...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 06:59:46 -0700

> > I think that the logical course would be to require that all PIs (before
> > or within the DTD) be reported in document order.  [...]
> 
> > Anything else would seem to drop the requirements of the XML spec
> > that PIs be reported.
> 
> I don't think that's really relevant.  This canonical form exists only
> for the purpose of testing, and should be whatever is convenient for
> that purpose.

It's there for testing conformance to the XML spec, so I can't
see how it would be anything except relevant ... :)


> > PIs within the
> > DTD would be either before or after the declarations.
> 
> If they're going to be output then before the declarations makes most
> sense, since I guess that most parsers that can report PIs in the DTD
> do so during parsing of the DTD, whereas the definitions of notations
> and entities may not be available until after the whole DTD has been
> processed.

Good point -- that order _would_ be more convenient.

• References:
  • Re: XML 1.0 Conformance Test Results
    • From: Richard Tobin <richard@c...>

• Prev by Date: Tags
• Next by Date: RE: Topic Maps,DAML, RDF, and others?
• Previous by thread: Re: XML 1.0 Conformance Test Results
• Next by thread: Re: XML 1.0 Conformance Test Results
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread