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

Re: Re WF, V, and MSXML

• From: len bullard <cbullard@h...>
• To: xml-dev@i...
• Date: Mon, 09 Jun 1997 06:21:51 -0500

Peter Murray-Rust wrote:
> 
> IMO it
> is more important for the WG/ERB to address *this* problem than some of the
> proposed extensions. 

That is right.  Until the core is worked out and clearer, proposing 
extensions is premature.

> The concept of WFness is NEW!!  

No it is not.  This is the way that IADS and IDE/AS work today 
and have since 1990.  The question is, what does one do with 
the DTD.  In these products, parsing for the instance is 
internal to the product.  DTD-centric parsing is done in 
batch.  That may not be the solution people want, but it is 
one way.  Well-formedness also has precedents in Xerox systems 
of the period.  T'is new to thee, Miranda.

> <PROPOSAL>
> All parsers (i.e. tools that take XML documents and apply the criteria in
> XML-LANG only) should state their attitude and behaviour to WFness and validity.
> </PROPOSAL>

You mean you REALLY want interoperable tools?  How quaint.
 
> The possible options include at least:
>         - nsgmls-like.  Full validation is the only option.  Any non-valid
>                 dcoument is flagged and appropriate error messages or error
>                 action is initiated.

IOW, always parse using a DTD.  Does the presence of the DOCTYPE
indicate 
that one exists, and maybe, where to find it?  Is the presence of the 
DOCTYPE enough to tell the system that one ought to exist?  I don't want 
to always send a DTD. I do want to be able to use SGML techniques that 
worked in the past and still work sensibly.

>         - Lark-like (at least V0.88 - I think there is another coming).  No
>                 validation can be attempted.  Any 'output' can only be WF or
>                 in error.  NOTE: what does Lark do with the internal subset?

Nyet.

>         - NXP-like.  Validation can be switched on or off by the 'client'.
>                 How this is transmitted to the application is application
>                 dependent at present.

This is the best approach if the flag is clear to all.

>         - MSXML-like.  Undocumented at present.  Possibly [though Terry and I
>                 hope not] validating by default, and changing to WF if this
>                 fails.

Ok.

len

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To unsubscribe, send to majordomo@i... the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (rzepa@i...)

• References:
  • Re: Re WF, V, and MSXML
    • From: Peter@u... (Peter Murray-Rust)

• Prev by Date: Re: Re WF, V, and MSXML
• Next by Date: Re: Re WF, V, and MSXML
• Previous by thread: Re: Re WF, V, and MSXML
• Next by thread: Re: Re WF, V, and MSXML
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread