[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: "Eve L. Maler" <elm@arbortext.com>
- To: xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
- Date: Mon, 19 Jan 1998 12:41:43 -0500
At 08:34 PM 1/18/98 -0500, David Megginson wrote:
...
>In other words, to turn your list (with my addition) on its head, a
>conforming, non-validating (or <socalled>well-formed</socalled>) XML
>parser is required to support nearly everything in the PR, with only
>the following exceptions:
...
I'm struck by the persistence of the usage of "well-formed processor" in
this forum. (I realize David is merely quoting the familiar form for those
who think of it this way...) Obviously, it's not very comfortable to name
something (a "non-validating XML processor") by the *absence* of a behavior.
Would it make sense to work the terminology as follows, for clarity's sake?
o XML processor (or XML parser): A software component that parses and
checks for well-formedness. The minimum of what a "non-validating XML
processor" is supposed to do today.
o XML validator: A software component that checks only for validity, using
input from an XML processor. What a "validating XML processor" is supposed
to do today.
Eve
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)
- Follow-Ups:
- XSL
- From: Daniel Pitti <dvp4c@jefferson.village.virginia.edu>
|
