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

SDD again

• From: David Megginson <ak117@f...>
• To: xml-dev <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 11:00:17 -0400

Paul Prescod writes:

 > Let me risk another step into the language courtroom. Validating
 > parsers must always read the whole DTD. So the SDD is only for
 > non-validating parsers. Non-validating parsers do not read element
 > type declarations. So what is the point of this line:

Your first premise is correct, but your second one is not.  The spec
states that a validating parser must use the whole DTD; it does not
state that a non-validating parser may not use the DTD.  AElfred, for
example, reads the DTD well enough that it can even flag ignorable
whitespace base on an element type's content model, but it is
non-validating.

That said, I still agree that the standalone declaration is wrong.
Perhaps some day, if there's an XML 1.1, we can think about fixing it.


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson                 ak117@f...
Microstar Software Ltd.         dmeggins@m...
      http://home.sprynet.com/sprynet/dmeggins/

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

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: SDD again
    • From: Paul Prescod <papresco@t...>

• References:
  • SDD again
    • From: Paul Prescod <papresco@t...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XML & SGML
• Next by Date: SAX: Final Requests?
• Previous by thread: SDD again
• Next by thread: Re: SDD again
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread