RE: XML is broken (was Re: Why Doesn't IE5 use the DTD toVa

Sarah Mitchell wrote:
>
>
> James Clark's responses on the issue have cleared up the issue
> from
> my perspective. I agree that the XML spec is not as explicit as
> it should be on what forces a validating parser to validate and
> that
> has allowed Microsoft to slide. But please don't suggest a whole
> new set of rules!
...
>
> This could be done quite simply by clarifying the XML spec to
> make it
> explicit that any presence of an ELEMENT declaration means that a
> validating parser must validate. Then Microsoft can either step
> back
> up to the bar or make it clear that IE5 is not a validating
> parser.
>

	I, for one, agree that IE5 does the correct thing here, and as James Clark
points out in a related message, the correct behavior is to require parsers
which process <?xml version="1.0" standalone="no" ?> documents to read the
external subset (and expand external entities and default attributes).
Validation itself is not the point. To me, generating a standard parse tree
is the point.

	This behavior ought depend on the (default)standalone="no" value rather
than the presence of an ELEMENT attribute. Whether or not to generate
validation errors ought be up to the client.

Jonathan Borden
http://jabr.ne.mediaone.net


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list