Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Debating "civil disobedience" against overlycomplicatedspe
 Eric van der Vlist wrote: > Even this definition is blur and cannot fully answer the question asked > by SOAP: is the doctype markup syntax or document content? > > I would say it is markup syntax, but this perception light be > application dependant... DOCTYPE declarations are not in this gray area by any precedent that I've seen. As you pointed out in the previously cited email, the XML Recommendation very carefully spells out the rules for validating and non-validating parsers. There is no option for usurping those rules and disallowing DOCTYPE declarations. I know of no other vocabulary that calls itself an application of XML in which I do not have the freedom, if I so choose, to declare an internal DTD subset in order to declare an internal entity. According to the XML spec, this practice is 100% interoperable among all XML processors, because they are *all* required to process the internal subset and resolve internal entities declared therein. An application without this guarantee should not be called an XML application. Instead, it is an application built on something other than an "XML processor". Sure, there are interoperability issues--they are part-and-parcel of the shades-of-conformance mess we get with XML 1.0. sml-dev and perhaps the XML Core WG can deal with these issues. However, they are not well addressed by putting the name "XML" on something that simply dismisses large parts of the XML Recommendation. Evan Lenz XYZFind Corp. 
|
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
|
|||||||||
