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

Re: Wellformed?

• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: Wellformed?
• From: "Karl Waclawek" <karl@w...>
• Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 11:03:03 -0400
• References: <02a601c44214$0ddb9510$6403a8c0@ARIMATHEA> <003001c44217$0ea7de60$0300a8c0@karlglen188> <40B2E9C3.2070601@o...>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bob Foster" <bob@o...>
To: "Karl Waclawek" <karl@w...>
Cc: "Jeff Rafter" <lists@j...>; <xml-dev@l...>
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 2:37 AM
> >>But the following is not:
> >>================
> >><!DOCTYPE doc [
> >>  <!ENTITY e "<foo bar1:att='att' bar2:att='att'>test</foo>">
> >>]>
> >><doc xmlns:bar1="http://www.example.org"
> >>     xmlns:bar2="http://www.example.org">
> >>  <child>&e;</child>
> >></doc>
> > 
> > Duplicate attribute - not OK.
> 
> This is well-formed WRT XML 1.0 (two different attributes, bar1:att and 
> bar2:att). A parser that is not "namespace-aware" certainly shouldn't 
> complain about it.

True.
 
> If a parser is "namespace-aware", i.e., checks conformance to Namespaces 
> In XML, then the document is in error, as it violates the constraint 
> that no tag may have two attributes with "qualified names with the same 
> local part and with prefixes which have been bound to namespace names 
> that are identical." But this is not a well-formed error. The first 
> version of the namespaces recommendation does not use the term 
> "well-formed" at all, and while the 1.1 version does, it is not used in 
> this context.

I guess this is true, formally speaking.
However, the main  point of a well-formedness violation is that it
represents a fatal error. This also applies to a violation of namespace
constraints. I don't see a practical difference there, unless your
processing context does not require or use namespaces.


Karl

• References:
  • Wellformed?
    • From: "Jeff Rafter" <lists@j...>
  • Re: Wellformed?
    • From: "Karl Waclawek" <karl@w...>
  • Re: Wellformed?
    • From: Bob Foster <bob@o...>

• Prev by Date: Poll: What is your XForms Player of choice?
• Next by Date: W3C XForms vs. XUI vs. XAML vs. MXML vs. SwiXml vs. XUL vs. Your Markup Here
• Previous by thread: Re: Wellformed?
• Next by thread: Re: Wellformed?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread