Re: Re: validating hairy data models (was Attribute o
> I'd argue that any spec that imposes additional constraints on > processors not imposed by XML 1.0 is not compliant with XML. I think this might usefully be called "strict compliance". That should be a familiar term for many people, with that meaning. As in: "Such a spec isn't strictly compliant with XML, although it does use XML in its surface syntax." The general issue is what someone pointed out: what to do with things that aren't explicitly mentioned in a specification. A strict interpretation of any spec says that you can't ever rely on such things ... ergo, it's as if they're forbidden. It's always safe to read a good spec strictly. If such a reading gives nonsense, it's a spec problem. - Dave
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