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

RE: Namespace conformance & SAX2

• From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@m...>
• To: Rob Lugt <roblugt@e...>, Chris Nokleberg <chris@s...>,xml-dev@l...
• Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 18:37:06 -0400

Rob Lugt wrote:
> Yes, perhaps my wording was unfortunate.  How about if I reword my
> explanation like so:-
>
> "Syntax errors are well-formedness errors in XML 1.0 and well-formedness
> errors are reported as fatal errors.  Therefore, it follows that syntax
> errors on the QName or NCName productions should be reported as
> fatal errors
> to be consistent."
>

no. XML 1.0 does not define a 'syntax error' as a well-formedness error. see
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml#sec-well-formed. Well-formedness constraints
applicable to XML are defined in the XML 1.0 rec, not in any other document.
These are labelled "WFC" in the spec. Similarly "Namespace Constraints" are
labelled "NSC" in the namespace spec. Do a grep and you'll see.

-Jonathan

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Namespace conformance & SAX2
    • From: Rob Lugt <roblugt@e...>

• References:
  • Re: Namespace conformance & SAX2
    • From: Rob Lugt <roblugt@e...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Namespace: what's the correct usage?
• Next by Date: Re: Namespace: what's the correct usage?
• Previous by thread: Re: Namespace conformance & SAX2
• Next by thread: Re: Namespace conformance & SAX2
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread