[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Requirements for making DTD validation work with namespaces
> > >The mechanism to which I alluded below neither ignores the problem nor > >does it entail parameter entities, and it conforms to three of the five > >constraints. Item 5 contradicts 1 and 2 and it doesn't make sense to > >implement both. > > I don't see how item 5 contradicts 1 or 2. > > It creates a new category of documents, distinct from "valid" and "invalid", > as defined in XML 1.0. I don't see how item 5 contradicts 1 or 2 either. The use of the word "SOME" might be changed. So, for instance, this might be better: > 5. SOME XML 1.0 documents that are Well-Formed, Invalid, and conform to > >the XML Namespaces REC, are considered to be "Namespace-Valid". 5. Namespace-Valid documents are well-formed, conform to the XML Namespace REC, but would be invalid but for Namespace-validation. That is a bit awkward too, but it is more precise than "some". Otherwise, these requirements are excellent. > > How you define this category is the whole point - everyone seems to have > ideas about this. > > I will not budge from requirements 1 - 3. > 3 is where a lot of proposals fall down. > > > > >I submit that any "special" processor behavior needs to be 100% compatible > >with XML 1.0 and the XML Namespaces Rec: > > 1. All XML 1.0 Valid documents are still Valid; > > 2. All XML 1.0 Invalid documents are still Invalid; > > 3. All namespace declarations work just as in the XML Namespaces REC > >(whether document is Valid or not) When you say, "All namespace declarations work just as in XML Namespaces REC," does this mean, they all work as they would in non-validating and validating parsers, but they work differently in a Namespace-validating parser, because the behavior of such a parser must be different to validate a well-formed document against two or more DTDs? I don't see how this will work (without changing XML 1.0 or Namespaces) without creating a new class of parser. Of course, this changes parser behavior described in the specs, but it does not change the syntax mandated by the specs. As I said in another post, I think the Namespace URI ought to fetch the DTD (or Schema, perhaps) and the parser ought to be smart enough to know that in the well-formed XML when Namespace A stops and Namespace B begins, the parser should start validating with DTD B instead of DTD A. Todd
|
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
|