• From: David Brownell <david-b@p...>
• To: Gary Stephenson <garys@i...>, xml-dev@l...
• Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 09:10:44 -0700

> //  pe01.ent
> 
> This is not a legal parameter entity, because
> it does not match the "markupdecl" production.
> 
> //  end of pe01.ent
> 
> My question is:  Given that the reference to "bad-pe" is _not_ to be expanded
> (due to it's appearance in an attribute value), is a validator required to
> open and attempt to parse the malformed external entity "pe01.ent"?  Obviously
> this test is predicated on an affirmative answer, but is it correct?

Go back and look closer at the test classification:  "error", meaning
there's something strange about it that parsers are NOT required to
report.  (Just like non-deterministic content models ...)

In this case, the test predates resolution of the PE-in-attributes issues
from the W3C process, and was intended to address text in the XML
spec referenced by that test metadata (in section 2.8).  Likely a better
way to test that requirement would be to put the PE  reference into
a conditional section that's not expanded.

- Dave

• References:
  • More Conformance Test suite questions
    • From: Gary Stephenson <garys@i...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Steve Ballmer is cracking up
• Next by Date: Re: Define a root in a DTD
• Previous by thread: Re: More Conformance Test suite questions
• Next by thread: Re: More Conformance Test suite questions
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread