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

Re: need a [ in an ATTLIST

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: need a [ in an ATTLIST
• From: Richard Tobin <richard@c...>
• Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 19:55:19 +0100 (BST)
• Cc:
• In-reply-to: <013a01c1da66$e9f2d710$0400a8c0@scott>
• Organization: HCRC, University of Edinburgh

>I think
>the word "lexical" is employed here to differentiate between VCs that check
>for legal tokens and VCs that check for valid document content such as valid
>IDREFs.

Yes, and there was some doubt about this resulting in clarification E9
to the second edition (http://www.w3.org/XML/xml-V10-2e-errata#E9):

   Change the title and the text of Attribute Default Legal Validity
   Constraint to:

     Validity Constraint: Attribute Default Value Syntactically Correct

     The declared default value must meet the syntactic constraints of
     the declared attribute type.

     Note that only the syntactic constraints of the type are required
     here; other constraints (e.g. that the value be the name of a
     declared unparsed entity, for an attribute of type ENTITY) may
     come into play if the declared default value is actually used (an
     element without a specification for this attribute occurs).

It seems perfectly reasonable, for example, to have a default value
for an ENTITY attribute naming an entity which the user need only
declare if he does indeed default the attribute.

However, I suppose even the erratum is not 100% clear.  Someone might
argue that matching one of the enumerated values is a syntactic
constraint.  What does SGML require?

-- Richard

• References:
  • Re: need a [ in an ATTLIST
    • From: "Rob Lugt" <roblugt@e...>

• Prev by Date: RE: need a [ in an ATTLIST
• Next by Date: Re: Compiled XML
• Previous by thread: Re: need a [ in an ATTLIST
• Next by thread: RE: need a [ in an ATTLIST
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread