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

Re: canonicalization

• To: Marcus Carr <mcarr@a...>
• Subject: Re: canonicalization
• From: Daniel Veillard <veillard@r...>
• Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 04:33:05 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <3C832B1E.2D941BB6@a...>; from mcarr@a... on Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 07:06:54PM +1100
• References: <1015032338.3309.3.camel@l...> <p04330103b8a7fd271d04@[192.168.254.4]> <1015178176.5268.43.camel@l...> <p04330104b8a8106aa395@[192.168.254.4]> <1015193078.3350.61.camel@l...> <p04330107b8a85bc15730@[192.168.254.4]> <1015201142.3309.108.camel@l...> <3C82B747.5020609@t...> <20020304025635.C18835@r...> <3C832B1E.2D941BB6@a...>
• Reply-to: veillard@r...
• User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i

On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 07:06:54PM +1100, Marcus Carr wrote:
> 
> Daniel Veillard wrote:
> 
> > I have at least one large user relying on it. They do DocBook
> > processing and XInclude allows to split the document like external
> > parsed entities. But the XInclude chunks can be DTD validated
> > directly contrary to entities.
> 
> Could you explain this please?

  Consider a large doc splitted into chapter. The resulting document
is built with XInclude. Each subdocument can contain a DOCTYPE and 
be validated independantly.
  The document used to glue them is not valid per that DTD, but the
large document resulting from XInclude processing is valid.

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Network https://rhn.redhat.com/
veillard@r...  | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: canonicalization
    • From: Marcus Carr <mcarr@a...>

• References:
  • canonicalization
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: canonicalization
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
  • Re: canonicalization
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: canonicalization
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
  • Re: canonicalization
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: canonicalization
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
  • Re: canonicalization
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: canonicalization
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
  • Re: canonicalization
    • From: Daniel Veillard <veillard@r...>
  • Re: canonicalization
    • From: Marcus Carr <mcarr@a...>

• Prev by Date: Re: canonicalization
• Next by Date: Re: canonicalization
• Previous by thread: Re: canonicalization
• Next by thread: Re: canonicalization
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread